Case T-416/08: Action brought on 29 September 2008 — EAÜ v Commission
Date: 2008-09-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: Estonia, European Community, action for annulment (EU), copyright, intellectual property

C 313/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.12.2008

Pleas in law and main arguments

the present application,

the applicant seeks,
By means of
pursuant to Article 230 EC, the annulment of Article 3 of
Commission Decision C(2008) 3435 of 16 July 2008 relating
to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA (Case
COMP/C2/38698 — CISAC) alleging that 24 of CISAC's (1) EEA
based societies, including the applicant, engaged in a concerted
practice ‘by coordinating the territorial delineations of the reci-
procal representation mandates granted to one another in a way
which limits a licence to the domestic territory of each
collecting society’.

The main pleas and arguments are similar or identical to those
raised in Case T-413/08.

(1) Refers to the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and

Composers (‘CISAC’).

Action brought on 29 September 2008 — IMRO v
Commission

(Case T-415/08)

(2008/C 313/72)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Irish Music Rights Organisation Ltd (The) — Eagras
um Chearta Cheolta (IMRO) (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by:
M. Favart, lawyer and D. Collins, Solicitor)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul Article 3 of the Commission decision of 16 July
2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA (Case COMP/C2/38.698-CISAC); and

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

findings in Article 3 of the contested decision stating that terri-
torial delineations of
the reciprocal representation mandates
granted by the authors' society to another constitute a concerted
practice in violation of Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA.

The applicant puts forward two pleas in law in support of its
claims.

First, the applicant submits that the Commission committed an
error of assessment, infringed the Article 81 EC and violated its
obligation to state reasons foreseen by Article 253 EC by
deciding that the parallel territorial delineation included in the
reciprocal representation agreements concluded by the applicant
and the other CISAC members is the result of a concerted prac-
tice. It claims that the level of evidence put forward by the
Commission in the decision is insufficient to establish that the
parallel conduct is not the result of normal competitive condi-
tion but constitutes such a concerted practice. The applicant
further states that the presence of the delineation clause in all of
its reciprocal agreements is justified by the interest of
its
members.

Second, in the alternative, the applicant argues that, contrary to
the findings of the contested decision, the territorial delineation
by CISAC societies in their reciprocal representation agreements
is not
restrictive of competition within the meaning of
Article 81(1) EC because it concerns a form of competition that
is not worthy of protection. Nevertheless, to the extent that the
alleged concerted practice on territorial delineations should be
considered to restrict competition, the applicant claims that it
cannot be considered illegal or infringing Article 81(1) EC
because it
is necessary and proportionate to the legitimate
objective of protecting the rights of the societies' members and
the authors.

Action brought on 29 September 2008 — EAÜ v
Commission

(Case T-416/08)

(2008/C 313/73)

Language of the case: English

Pleas in law and main arguments

Parties

By means of this application the applicant seeks partial annul-
ment, pursuant to Article 230 EC, of Commission Decision
C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 (Case COMP/C2/38.698 —
CISAC) relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA. Precisely, the applicant contests the Commission

Applicant: Eesti Autorite Ühing (EAÜ) (Tallinn, Estonia) (repre-
sented by: M. Favart, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/41

Form of order sought

— Annul Article 3 of the Commission decision of 16 July
2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA (Case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC); and

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of this application the applicant seeks partial annul-
to Article 230 EC of Commission Decision
ment pursuant
C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 (Case COMP/C2/38.698 —
CISAC) relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA. Precisely, the applicant contests the Commission
findings in Article 3 of the contested decision stating that terri-
the reciprocal representation mandates
torial delineations of
society to another constitute a
granted by one authors'
concerted practice
in violation of Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA.

The pleas in law and main arguments raised by the applicant
are identical to those raised by the applicant in Case T-415/08
IMRO v Commission.

findings in Article 3 of the contested decision stating that terri-
the reciprocal representation mandates
torial delineations of
society to another constitute a
granted by one authors'
in violation of Article 81 EC and
concerted practice
Article 53 EEA.

The pleas in law and main arguments raised by the applicant
are identical to those raised by the applicant in Case T-415/08
IMRO v Commission.

Action brought on 29 September 2008 — OSA v
Commission

(Case T-418/08)

(2008/C 313/75)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Action brought on 29 September 2008 — SPA v
Commission

Applicant: Ochranný svaz autorský pro práva k dílům hudebním
(OSA)
(represented by: M. Favart,
lawyer)

(Prague, Czech Republic)

(Case T-417/08)

(2008/C 313/74)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sociedade Portuguesa de Autores CRL (SPA) (Lisbon,
Portugal) (represented by: M. Favart, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European communities

Form of order sought

— Annul Article 3 of the Commission decision of 16 July
2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA (Case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC); and

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of this application the applicant seeks partial annul-
to Article 230 EC of Commission Decision
ment pursuant
C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 (Case COMP/C2/38.698 —
CISAC) relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA. Precisely, the applicant contests the Commission

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul Article 3 of the Commission decision of 16 July
2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA (Case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC); and

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of this application the applicant seeks partial annul-
ment pursuant
to Article 230 EC of Commission Decision
C(2008) 3435 final of 16 July 2008 (Case COMP/C2/38.698 —
CISAC) relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA. Precisely, the applicant contests the Commission
findings in Article 3 of the contested decision stating that terri-
the reciprocal representation mandates
torial delineations of
society to another constitute a
granted by one authors'
concerted practice
in violation of Article 81 EC and
Article 53 EEA.

The pleas in law and main arguments raised by the applicant
are identical to those raised by the applicant in Case T-415/08
IMRO v Commission.