Case T-99/04: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 July 2008 — AC-Treuhand v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Organic peroxides — Fines — Article 81 EC — Rights of the defence — Right to a fair hearing — Meaning of perpetrator of an infringement — Principle of nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege — Principle of legal certainty — Legitimate expectations)
Date: 2008-07-08
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), chemical industry, fine, inter-company cooperation, organic chemical, oxide, restriction on competition

C 209/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

15.8.2008

Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of
1 July 2008 — Região autónoma dos Açores v Council

5. Orders Stichting Greenpeace Council
incurred in the present proceedings.

to bear

its own costs as

(Case T-37/04) (1)

(Action for annulment — Regulation (EC) No 1954/2003 —
Fisheries — Management of the fishing effort — Community
fishing areas and resources — Action brought by a regional
body — Persons individually concerned — Inadmissibility)

6. Orders Porto de Abrigo — Organização de Produtores da Pesca
CRL and GÊ-Questa — Associação de Defesa do Ambiente to
bear their own costs as incurred in the interim proceedings.

(1) OJ C 94, 17.4.2004.

(2008/C 209/71)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Região autónoma dos Açores (Portugal) (represented
initially by: M. Renouf, S. Crosby, C. Bryant, Solicitors, and H.
Mercer, Barrister, and subsequently by M. Renouf, C. Bryant and
H. Mercer)

Defendant: Council of
J. Monteiro and F. Florindo Gijón, acting as Agents)

the European Union (represented by:

Interveners in support of the applicants: Seas at Risk VZW, formerly
Stichting Seas at Risk Federation (Brussels, Belgium); WWF —
World Wide Fund for Nature, (Gland, Switzerland); and Stichting
Greenpeace Council (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by:
R. Buxton, Solicitor, and D. Owen, Barrister).

the defendants: Commission of
the
Interveners
in support of
European Communities
(represented by: T. van Rijn and
B. Doherty, acting as Agents) and Kingdom of Spain, (repre-
sented by: N. Díaz Abad, abogado del Estado)

Re:

Action seeking artial annulment of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1954/2003 of 4 November 2003 on the management of
the fishing effort relating to certain Community fishing areas
and resources and modifying Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 and
repealing Regulations (EC) No 685/95 and (EC) No 2027/95
(OJ 2003 L 289, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible.

2. Orders Região autónoma dos Açores to bear its own costs and pay
including those incurred in the interim

the Council,

those of
proceedings.

3. Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the Commission to bear their
own costs, including those incurred in the interim proceedings.

4. Orders Seas at Risk VZW and WWF — World Wide Fund for
including those incurred in the

Nature to bear their own costs,
interim proceedings.

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 8 July 2008 —
AC-Treuhand v Commission

(Case T-99/04) (1)

(Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
— Organic peroxides — Fines — Article 81 EC — Rights of
the defence — Right to a fair hearing — Meaning of perpe-
trator of an infringement — Principle of nullum crimen, nulla
poena sine lege — Principle of legal certainty — Legitimate
expectations)

(2008/C 209/72)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: AC-Treuhand AG (Zurich, Switzerland)
by: M. Karl, C. Steinle and J. Drolshammer, lawyers)

(represented

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: A. Bouquet, Agent, and A. Böhlke, lawyer)

Re:

of

Commission

of
Annulment
2005/349/EC
10 December 2003 relating to a proceeding pursuant
to
Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case
(OJ 2005 L 110,
COMP/E-2/37.857 — Organic peroxides)
p. 44)

decision

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders AC-Treuhand AG to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 118, 30.4.2004.