Case T-421/08: Action brought on 29 September 2008 — Performing Right Society v Commission
Date: 2008-09-29
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Community, United Kingdom, action for annulment (EU), broadcasting, copyright, intellectual property

C 313/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.12.2008

Action brought on 29 September 2008 — LATGA-A v
Commission

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-419/08)

(2008/C 313/76)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lietuvos Autorių Teisių Gynimo Asociacijos Agentūra
(LATGA-A)
(represented by: M. Favart,
lawyer)

(Vilnius, Lithuania)

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.

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/C2/38698 — CISAC); and

— Order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

the present application,

By means of
the applicant seeks,
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 — Performing
Right Society v Commission

(Case T-421/08)

(2008/C 313/78)

Language of the case: English

Action brought on 29 September 2008 — SAZAS v
Commission

(Case T-420/08)

(2008/C 313/77)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Združenje skladateljev, avtorjev in založnikov za
zaščito avtorskih pravic Slovenije (Sazas) (Trzin, Slovenia) (repre-
sented by: M. Favart, lawyer)

Parties

Applicant: Performing Right Society Ltd (London, United
Kingdom)
J. Rivas Andrés and M. Nissen,
lawyers)

(represented by:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

— Annul the Commission decision dated 16 July 2008 relating
to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA
(Case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC) on the ground of the
absence of a starting date of the infractions and hence of
their duration;

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/43

— Annul Article 3 and/or Article 4(2) of the Commission deci-
sion dated 16 July 2008 relating to a proceeding under
Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA (Case COMP/C2/38.698
— CISAC);

Under the third plea in law put forward by the applicant, the
remedies imposed by Article 4(2) of the contested decision are
legally uncertain, unjustified, not necessary and/or dispropor-
tionate to bring the alleged infringement to an end.

— In the alternative, annul Article 3 and/or Article 4(2) of the
Commission decision dated 16 July 2008 relating to a
proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA (Case
COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC) as regards to the inclusion of
the applicant;

— Order that the Commission pay the costs incurred by the

applicant.

Under its fourth plea, the applicant submits that the Commis-
sion infringed its right to be heard by not informing it of its
reasons not to accept the proposed commitments.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the
implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81
and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1).

Pleas in law and main arguments

Action brought on 27 September 2008 — INTER-NETT
2000 v OHIM

the present application,

By means of
the applicant seeks,
pursuant to Article 230 EC, the annulment, in whole or in part,
of Commission Decision C(2008) 3435 of 16 July 2008
relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA
(Case COMP/C2/38.698 — CISAC).

(Case T-423/08)

(2008/C 313/79)

Language in which the application was lodged: Hungarian

the applicant alleges that

Under the first plea in law,
the
reasoning in the contested decision does not support a finding
of infringement for any of the following three forms of exploita-
tion: satellite broadcasting, on-line and cable retransmission. On
this basis, the applicant contends that the Commission failed to
provide evidence relating to the alleged existence of a concerted
practice in which all EEA CISAC members engaged by limiting
the scope of their reciprocal mandates to their respective terri-
tories. This constitutes, according to the applicant, an error of
assessment
and an infringement of Article 81 EC and
Article 253 EC. Indeed, the applicant submits that there is no
parallel behaviour amongst all EEA CISAC members as illu-
strated by the exceptions to the territorial delineation mentioned
in the contested decision itself. In addition, the applicant claims
that the contested decision suffers from inadequate reasoning
due to its silence as to the starting date and therefore the dura-
the infringements, notably the concerted practice,
tion of
thereby also infringing Articles 2 and 16(1) of Regulation (EC)
No 1/2003 (1).

Under the second plea in law the applicant submits that the
reasoning in the contested decision is faulty as it does not prove
that the applicant participated in the alleged concerted practice.
Further, according to the applicant there is a plausible explana-
tion to its behaviour other than the existence of a concerted
practice, namely, that is chooses those solutions which it deems
to be commercially preferable. It is submitted, moreover, that
in accordance with established case-law,
the Commission,
individual
is
should have looked into whether
economic behaviour
to appoint one or more additional
collecting societies to be able to compete with both the local
collecting society and the grantor society doing direct licensing.

rational

it

Parties

Applicant(s): INTER-NETT 2000 Kereskedelmi és Szolgáltató kft
(Inter-Nett 2000 Kft)
(represented by: E.
Petruska, lawyer)

(Mór, Hungary)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market
(Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party/parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of
OHIM: Unión de Agricultores, S.A. (El Ejido, Spain)

Form of order sought

— Set aside the decision of the second Board of Appeal of the
Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks
and Designs) of 22 July 2008 (Case R 71/2008-2) and

— Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: INTER-NETT 2000

Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark ‘HUNGARO’
for goods and services in classes 29, 31 and 35 (application
No 004508917).