CELEX: C2002/084/111
Language: en
Date: 2002-04-06 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 6 December 2001 by SIC — Sociedade Independente de Comunicação S.A. against Commission of the European Communities (Case T-298/01)

C 84/60                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                     6.4.2002
In the absence of any reply from the Commission, the                            complaints of 22 October 1996 and 20 June 1997 lodged
applicant, by letter of 26 July 2001, called upon it to take                    by the applicant;
action in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 232.
                                                                          3.    order the Commission to pay all the costs.
After the expiry of the period of two months prescribed by the
Treaty, the Commission had not initiated the procedure nor
responded to the call to take action.
                                                                          Pleas in law and main arguments
In early November 2001, after the abovementioned two-
month period had expired, the applicant received a letter from            The applicant is a commercial company whose sole object is
the Commission informing it that the internal preparatory                 the pursuit of television broadcasting activities.
work for compliance with the judgment of the Court of First
Instance of May 2000 was almost complete.
                                                                          On 22 October 1996, the applicant lodged with Directorate
                                                                          General for Competition — DG IV of the Commission —
The applicant takes the view that that letter is a merely                 a complaint against the Portuguese Republic and RTP —
provisional step which does not define the position of the                Radiotelevisão Portuguesa, alleging breach of Community rules
defendant institution.                                                    on competition, in particular of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC
                                                                          Treaty.
                                                                          The complaint concerned a number of measures adopted by
                                                                          the Portuguese Government in favour of RTP, a public operator
                                                                          holding the public service television concession, taking the
                                                                          view that such measure constituted State aid within the
Action brought on 6 December 2001 by SIC — Sociedade                      meaning of Article 87 of the EC Treaty and that such aid had
Independente de Comunicação S.A. against Commission                      been granted contrary to Article 88(3) of the Treaty.
                 of the European Communities
                         (Case T-298/01)                                  The complaint related, in particular, to compensatory pay-
                                                                          ments made in 1994, 1995 and 1996 by the Portuguese
                                                                          Republic to RTP.
                         (2002/C 84/111)
                  (Language of the case: Portuguese)                      The payments for 1994 and 1995 were the subject of a
                                                                          Commission decision of 7 November 1996, against which an
                                                                          action for annulment was brought.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                The failure to act which constitutes the subject-matter of the
European Communities on 6 December 2001 by SIC —                          present action relates to the compensatory payment for 1996.
Sociedade Independente de Comunicação S.A., whose regis-
tered office is at Carnaxide, Linda-a-Velha (Portugal), represent-
ed by Carlos Botelho Moniz, lawyer.                                       Such a measure constitutes State aid within the meaning of
                                                                          Article 87 of the EC Treaty, since it was implemented by the
                                                                          Portuguese State contrary to Article 88(3) without previously
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               notifying the Commission.
1.   find the action admissible;
                                                                          The measure was brought to the attention of the Commission
2.   accordingly, in view of the duty incumbent on the                    by means of the complaint of 22 October 1996, that is to say,
     Commission under Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty as              more than 5 years ago, no decision having been taken by that
     regards the preliminary assessment of State aid measures             Community institution with regard to the 1996 compensatory
     brought to its attention, as well as of the general principles       payment until the end of November 2001.
     of law to which it is subject, in particular the principles
     of legality, good administration and care, declare that the
     Commission failed, contrary to Articles 87 and 88 of the             On 20 June 1997 the applicant lodged with Directorate
     Treaty and the abovementioned general principles of law,             General for Competition — DG IV of the Commission — a
     in its duty to adopt a decision regarding the request for            fresh complaint against the Portuguese Republic and RTP
     the procedure under Article 88(2) to be initiated in                 alleging breach of Community rules on competition, in
     respect of the measures which were the subject of the                particular of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty.
 ---pagebreak--- 6.4.2002              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 84/61
In view of the inactivity of the Community institution, the             It was stated in the application that the Community Ship-
applicant, by letter of 26 July 2001, received by the Com-              owners should hold 60 % of the shares of the joint enterprise,
mission on 30 July 2001, more than 53 months after                      while the partner in the relevant third Country, Namibia,
the complaint was lodged, called on the Commission, in                  should hold 40 % of the shares. After the withdrawal of the
accordance with Article 232 of the EC Treaty, to adopt a                project of the Spanish company E. Vieira S.A. and the
position on the complaint and initiate the procedure under              replacement of two of the four vessels involved with two other
Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.                                         vessels, the applicant and the Namibian partner concluded an
                                                                        agreement, according to which the applicant owned 28,51 %
                                                                        of the share capital, but only 13,68 % of the voting rights.
The Commission replied, after the two-month time-limit                  Finally, with effect from 1 May 1995, the applicant transferred
prescribed by Article 232, in a letter of 24 October 2001, in           part of its shareholding in the joint entreprise to the Namibian
which it does not define its position, but merely states that it        partner under an agreement providing that the applicant’s
is completing the internal preparatory work with regard to the          shareholding was reduced to 1 % of the share capital.
complaints.                                                             According to the contested Decision, the basis for providing
                                                                        financial aid has ceased to exist because of this reduction to
                                                                        1 % of the applicant’s shareholding in the joint undertaking,
                                                                        which is not be considered sufficient for a joint enterprise, as
                                                                        defined by Community Regulations.
Action brought on 17 December 2001 by Norway Sea-
foods Denmark A/S against the Commission of the                         The contested Decision infringes Article 44(1) of the above
                   European Communities                                 mentioned Council Regulation (EEC) No. 4028/86.
                        (Case T-319/01)                                 —     The reduction of the applicant’s shareholding in the joint
                                                                              enterprise to 1 % did not mean that a joint enterprise
                                                                              within the meaning of the Regulation no longer existed.
                        (2002/C 84/112)
                                                                        —     The applicant had a legitimate expectation that the
                  (Language of the case: English)                             reduction of the Applicant’s shareholding in the joint
                                                                              enterprise to 1 % would not result in any demand for
                                                                              repayment of aid from the Commission.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 17 December 2001 by Norway                      (1) OJ L 380 of 31.12.1990, p. 1.
Seafoods Denmark A/S, represented by Mr Jacob Ørndrup of
Gorrissen Federspiel Kierkegaard, Copenhagen (Denmark).
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     annul Commission Decision K(2001)3079 of 16 October
      2001
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.                            Action brought on 19 December 2001 by Mercedes
                                                                        Alvarez Moreno against Commission of the European
                                                                                                 Communities
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                                                (Case T-323/01)
The present application has been lodged against Commission
Decision K(2001)3079 of 16 October 2001, regarding the                                          (2002/C 84/113)
reduction and repayment of financial aid to Foodmark A/S
under Commission Decision K(93)1823 of 5 July 1993, as
amended by Decision K(94)119 of 27 January 1994, for                                       (Language of the case: French)
Project SM/DNK/02/93, the object of which was an application
for financial aid pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC)
No. 4028/88 of 18 December 1986, on Community measures
to improve and adapt structures in the fisheries and aquacul-
ture sector as amended by Council Regulation (EEC)                      An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
No. 3944/90 of 20 December 1990 (1). The applicant’s name               ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
at the time of this application was Foodmark A/S; this name             European Communities on 19 December 2001 by Mercedes
was later changed to Foodmark Holding A/S and later still to            Alvarez Moreno, residing in Berlin, represented by Georges
Norway Seafoods Denmark A/S.                                            Vandersanden and Laura Levi, avocats.