Case C-335/08 P: Appeal brought on 21 July 2008 by Transports Schiocchet — Excursions SARL against the order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 19 May 2008 in Case T-220/07 Transports Schiocchet — Excursions v Commission
Date: 2008-07-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: appeal, bus, carriage of passengers, competition law, human rights, international road transport

8.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/17

According to the Commission, a scheme of prior authorisation
may, in certain circumstances, be justified on grounds of public
health, but such a scheme would,
in any event, have to
satisfy the criterion of proportionality and comply with the
conditions laid down in the case-law, including those set out in
Case C-24/00 Commission v France [2004] ECR I-1277. In the
present case, a number of those conditions are not satisfied, as
the procedures provided for by that legislation are not easily
accessible, expeditious and susceptible to challenge by way of
legal proceedings in the event of authorisation being refused.

to decisions of the Community judicature, Article 235 EC, the
second paragraph of Article 288 EC and Article 13 of the
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
in paragraph 39 of the
Fundamental Freedoms inasmuch as,
contested order, the Court of First Instance that the commence-
ment of the appellants actions before the national courts neither
suspended nor interrupted the limitation period, whereas in its
earlier decisions, which are now res judicata, the Court encour-
aged it to continue its action before the national courts.

In its second plea, the appellant complains of several errors
committed by the Court of First Instance in assessing the condi-
tions for non-contractual liability concerning distortion of the
facts and the forms of order sought in the appellant's applica-
tion, the second paragraph of Article 288 EC and Article 230 EC
with regard,
in particular to the alleged confirmation of the
Commission's position by the national courts and the assess-
ment made of the period in which the damage was suffered.

In its third and final plea, the appellant invokes an infringement
of Article 4(2) and Article 2(1)(3) of Regulation No 684/92 (1)
inasmuch as the Court of First Instance erroneously accepted the
interpretation and wrongly characterised the
Commission's
the appellant's competitors as
activities of
regular
from
therefore
and
services’
authorisation, whereas they are in fact parallel or temporary
services (Article 2(1)(3)), subject to the same rules as the regular
services operated by the appellant.

‘special
exempt

(Article

4(2))

(1) OJ 1992 L 74, p. 1.

Action brought on 24 July 2008 — Commission of the
European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-342/08)

(2008/C 285/29)

Language of the case: French

Appeal brought on 21 July 2008 by Transports Schiocchet
— Excursions SARL against the order of the Court of First
Instance (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 19 May 2008
in Case T-220/07 Transports Schiocchet — Excursions v
Commission

(Case C-335/08 P)

(2008/C 285/28)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Transports Schiocchet — Excursions SARL (repre-
sented by: D. Schönberger, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities

the European

Form of order sought

— Annul the order of the Court of First Instance of 19 May

2008;

— Decide the case definitively by granting the applications

sought at first instance;

— In the alternative, remit

the case to the Court of First

Instance;

— Order the Commission to pay the costs in their entirety.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Parties

The appellant puts forward three pleas in law in support of its
appeal.

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: G. Rozet and A. Sipos, acting as Agents)

In its first plea, the appellant claims that the Court of First
Instance infringed the principle of legal certainty which applies

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium