Case T-246/08: Action brought on 25 June 2008 — Melli Bank v Council
Date: 2008-06-25
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Council of the European Union, Iran, action for annulment (EU), dual-use good, economic sanctions, export monitoring, international sanctions, nuclear non-proliferation, technology transfer

C 197/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.8.2008

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 25 June 2008 — Melli Bank v Council

By Decision C(2004) 2815 of 19 July 2004, the Commission
declared compatible with the common market the concentration
by which Bertelsmann AG and Sony Corporation of America
acquired joint control of the joint venture company Sony BMG
combining their recorded music businesses (Case No. COMP/
M.3333-Sony/BMG). By the judgment of 13 July 2006, the
Court of First Instance annulled the Commission's decision (2).
the case was re-notified to the
Following this annulment,
Commission who reassessed the concentration under
the
current market circumstances and by contested Decision C
(2007) 4507 of 3 October 2007 authorised the merger as
compatible with the common market and functioning of the
EEA Agreement.

The applicant who is an international association representing
independent music companies — competitors to the parties to
the merger seeks the annulment of that decision. It claims that
in authorising the merger the Commission committed a mani-
fest error of assessment, and/or misapplied the law on collective
dominance and/or infringed Article 253 EC by:

— failing to apply the correct test and to properly assess the
existence, strengthening or creation of a collective dominant
position in the physical recorded music market and market
for recorded music in digital formats;

— failing to conduct a prospective analysis as to whether or
not the concentration might strengthen or create a collective
dominant position on the market
for physical recorded
for recorded music in digital
music and/or
formats, and failing to give reasons or sufficient reasons for
dispensing with a prospective analysis;

the market

— failing to conduct a proper analysis concerning the possible
effects of the merger on consumer choice or cultural diver-
sity, or to make a prospective analysis thereof; and

— in conclusion, failing to find that the merger strengthened or
created a collective dominant position in the physical
recorded music market and market for recorded music in
digital formats.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the
control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ 1989 L 395,
p. 1, corrigendum OJ 1990 L 257, p. 13).

(2) Case T-464/04, Impala v. Commission, [2006] ECR II-2289, judgment
on appeal, Case C-413/06 P, Bertelsmann and Sony Corporation of
America v Impala.

(Case T-246/08)

(2008/C 197/59)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Melli Bank plc (London, United Kingdom)
(repre-
sented by: R. Gordon, QC, J. Stratford, Barrister, R. Gwynne and
T. Din, Solicitors)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

— Annul paragraph 4, section B, of the annex to Council Deci-
sion 2008/475/EC concerning restrictive measures against
Iran, in so far as it relates to Melli Bank plc;

— Grant such further or other relief as may seem just and

appropriate in the circumstances;

— Order that the Council pay the Bank's costs of this applica-

tion.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the present case the applicant seeks the partial annulment of
Council Decision 2008/475/EC of 23 June 2008 (1)
imple-
menting Article 7(2) of Council Regulation No 423/2007
concerning restrictive measures against Iran (2) in so far as the
applicant is included on the list of natural and legal persons,
entities and bodies whose funds and economic resources are
frozen in accordance with this provision.

The applicant seeks the annulment of paragraph 4, section B, of
the Annexe,
in so far as it relates to the applicant, on the
grounds that it is unlawful in two respects.

First, the applicant claims that the contested decision is dispro-
portionate in that freezing the funds and economic assets of the
applicant
(i) has no rational relationship with the aim of
preventing nuclear proliferation or its funding and (ii) it is not
the least restrictive mean of exercising vigilance against the
applicant or of pursuing the aim of preventing the funding of
nuclear proliferation.

2.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/35

Second, the applicant claims that the contested decision violates
the principle of non-discrimination in that, on one hand, the
applicant is in the same position to other UK subsidiaries of the
Iranian banks, and is in materially comparable position to other
UK banks including UK banks trading with Iran, but has been
treated in a different manner and, on the other hand, is in a
significantly different position to another bank designated by
the United Nations Security Council but has been treated in the
same manner.

(1) OJ 2008 L 163, p. 29.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 of 19 April 2007 (OJ 2007

L 103, p. 1).

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 June 2008 —
Martins v Commission

(Case T-11/04) (1)

(2008/C 197/62)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 59, 6.3.2004.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 26 May 2008 —
Ypma v Council and Commission

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 June 2008 —
Martinez-Mongay v Commission

(Case T-9/94) (1)

(2008/C 197/60)

Language of the case: Dutch

(Case T-101/04) (1)

(2008/C 197/63)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Eighth Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 59, 26.2.1994.

(1) OJ C 106, 30.4.2004.

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 June 2008 —
Katalagarianakis v Commission

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 June 2008 —
Piccinni-Leopardi v Commission

(Case T-402/03) (1)

(2008/C 197/61)

Language of the case: French

(Case T-128/04) (1)

(2008/C 197/64)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

The President of the Seventh Chamber has ordered that the case
be removed from the register.

(1) OJ C 35, 7.2.2004.

(1) OJ C 118, 30.4.2004.