CELEX: 62003TA0388
Language: en
Date: 2009-02-10 00:00:00
Title: Case T-388/03: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 February 2009 — Deutsche Post and DHL International v Commission (State aid — Decision not to raise objections — Action for annulment — Standing to bring proceedings — Admissibility — Serious difficulties)

21.3.2009   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 69/34
            
         Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 10 February 2009 — Deutsche Post and DHL International v Commission
   (Case T-388/03) (1)
   
   (State aid - Decision not to raise objections - Action for annulment - Standing to bring proceedings - Admissibility - Serious difficulties)
   (2009/C 69/79)
   Language of the case: German
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Deutsche Post AG (Bonn, Germany) and DHL International (Diegem, Belgium) (represented by: J. Sedemund and T. Lübbig, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Kreuschitz and M. Niejahr, Agents)
   Re:
   Annulment of Commission Decision C(2003) 2508 final of 23 July 2003 raising no objections, following the preliminary examination procedure provided for in Article 88(3) EC, to various measures adopted by the Belgian authorities in favour of La Poste SA, the Belgian public postal undertaking.
   Operative part of the judgment
   The Court:
   
               1.
            
            
               Annuls Commission Decision C(2003) 2508 final of 23 July 2003 raising no objections, following the preliminary examination procedure provided for in Article 88(3) EC, to various measures adopted by the Belgian authorities in favour of La Poste SA, the Belgian public postal undertaking;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Deutsche Post AG and DHL International.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 35, 7.2.2004.