CELEX: C2003/184/83
Language: en
Date: 2003-08-02 00:00:00
Title: Case T-121/03: Action brought on 10 April 2003 by Greenpeace Limited and Nexgen Group Limited (trading as ECOTRICITY) against the Commission of the European Communities

C 184/36               EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                          2.8.2003
Directive 2000/60/EC (OJ 2001 L 331, p. 1), the Court of First                     ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
Instance (Third Chamber), composed of: K. Lenaerts, President,
J. Azizi and M. Jaeger, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has made an                                       of 23 April 2003
order on 6 May 2003, the operative part of which is as follows:
                                                                            in Case T-73/03: Bernard Zaoui and Others v Commission
1.    The application is dismissed as inadmissible.                                        of the European Communities (1)
2.    The applicant shall bear its own costs and pay the costs              (Non-contractual liability of the Community — Application
      incurred by the Parliament and the Council.                                                   manifestly unfounded)
3.    The Commission shall bear its own costs.
                                                                                                       (2003/C 184/82)
(1) OJ C 144 of 15.06.2002.                                                                      (Language of the case: French)
                                                                            In Case T-73/03, Bernard Zaoui, residing in Combs La Ville
                                                                            (France), Lucien Zaoui, residing in Netanya (Israel) and Deborah
                                                                            Zaoui, residing in Ramat Gan (Israel), represented by
                                                                            J.A. Buchinger, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxem-
       ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE                                 bourg, against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                            — application for compensation for damage allegedly suffered
                                                                            by the applicants following an attack carried out in Netanya
                         of 30 April 2003                                   (Israel) on 27 March 2002 — the Court of First Instance (First
                                                                            Chamber), composed of B. Vesterdorf, President, H. Legal and
                                                                            M.E. Martins Ribero, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, made an order
in Case T-154/02: Villiger Söhne GmbH v Council of the
                                                                            on 23 April 2003, the operative part of which is as follows:
                        European Union (1)
                                                                            1)    The application is rejected.
(Action for annulment — Article 3(1) and first indent of
Article 4(2) of Directive 2002/10/EC — Structure and rate
of excise duty applied on manufactured tobacco — Manifestly                 2)    The applicants are ordered to pay the costs.
                            inadmissible)
                                                                            (1) OJ 2003 C 124.
                          (2003/C 184/81)
                   (Language of the case: German)
In Case T-154/02: Villiger Söhne GmbH, established in Wald-                 Action brought on 10 April 2003 by Greenpeace Limited
shut-Tiengen (Germany), represented by B. Wägenbaur, lawyer,                and Nexgen Group Limited (trading as ECOTRICITY)
against Council of the European Union (Agents: F. Gijón and                    against the Commission of the European Communities
M. Simm) — application for annulment of Article 3(1) of
Council Directive 2002/10/EC of 12 February 2002 amending
Directives 92/79/EEC, 92/80/EEC and 95/59/EC as regards the                                            (Case T-121/03)
structure and rates of excise duty applied on manufactured
tobacco (OJ 2002 L 46, p. 26) and, in the alternative, of the                                          (2003/C 184/83)
first indent of Article 4(2) of that directive — the Court of
First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of K. Lenaerts, Presi-
dent of the Chamber, J. Azizi and M. Jaeger, Judges; H. Jung,                                   (Language of the case: English)
Registrar, made an order on 30 April 2003, the operative part
of which is as follows:
                                                                            An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
1.    The application is dismissed as inadmissible.                         nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                            European Communities on 10 April 2003 by Greenpeace
                                                                            Limited, London, United Kingdom, and Nexgen Group Limited
2.    The applicant is ordered to pay the costs.
                                                                            (trading as ECOTRICITY), Gloucestershire, United Kingdom,
                                                                            represented by P. Lasok QC, Mr J. Turner and Ms R. Haynes,
3.    There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for leave to       Barristers.
      intervene.
                                                                            The applicant claims that the Court should:
(1) OJ C 191 10.8.02.
                                                                            —     annul the Contested Decision and order the Commission
                                                                                  to pay the Applicants costs.
 ---pagebreak--- 2.8.2003              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                         C 184/37
Pleas in law and main arguments                                           The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                          —      annul the Secretary-General's decision of 13 June 2002
The applicants in the present case seek the annulment of the                     which confirms, without amendment, the applicant's staff
Commission's Decision approving the grant by the United                          report for the period from 1 July 1997 to 30 June 1999;
Kingdom of State aid, in the form of ‘rescue aid’, to British
Energy plc (BE), a generator of electricity in the United                 —      annul the Commission's decision of 13 January 2003
Kingdom. The main source of its electricity is nuclear power.                    rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant on
                                                                                 13 September 2002;
The applicants contend that the contested Decision is unlawful            —      order the defendant to pay damages of EUR 10 000;
in as much as it failed adequately or properly to assess
whether the aid was warranted by serious social difficulties,             —      order the defendant to pay the full costs of the proceed-
and whether the amount of aid was restricted to the minimum                      ings.
necessary, both in accordane with point 23(e) of the Guidelines
on State aid for Rescuing and Restructureting firms in diffi-
culty (1).
                                                                          Pleas in law and main arguments
In particular, the applicants submit that the defendant institu-          The applicant is an official in DG II of the European Commis-
tion wrongly concluded that, in the absence of the aid in                 sion. With a delay of almost two years, the appellant was the
question, BE would be insolvent and would most certainly                  subject of a staff report for the period 1997 to 1999. That
have to cease operations, without considering whether puttig              report was confirmed by the appeal assessor.
BE into administration would have been an appropriate rescue
option entailing the grant of less aid, nor the possibility
involving the closure of only one or several of its plants as             The applicant claims that the Commission made a manifest
opposed to all of them.                                                   error of assessment and misused its powers in drawing up that
                                                                          report. In support of his claims, the applicant also maintains
                                                                          that the Commission failed to comply with Article 43 of the
Moreover, the applicants dissagree with the Commision's                   Staff Regulations, thus giving rise to procedural defects. Finally,
conclusion that nuclear plants cannot be mothballed and that              the defendant failed to comply with its obligation to state
BE's plants could not be closed without giving rise to serious            reasons.
concerns over nuclear safety.
Finally, the applicants submit that the Commission have
wrongly concluded that the closure of BE's plants led to a
loss of 20 % of UK electricity generating capacity such as to
threaten security of supply and, in any event, failed to consider         Action brought on 4 May 2003 by Scania AB against the
the reduced impact on generating capacity of closing only one                        Commission of the European Communities
or several of BE's plants.
                                                                                                    (Case T-163/03)
(1) OJ 1999 No C 288, p. 2.
                                                                                                    (2003/C 184/85)
                                                                                              (Language of the case: English)
                                                                          An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
                                                                          nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
                                                                          European Communities on 4 May 2003 by Scania AB, Söder-
Action brought on 30 April 2003 by Michael Cwik against
                                                                          tälje, Sweden, represented by Mr S. Pappas, lawyer.
       the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                          The applicant claims that the Court should:
                         (Case T-157/03)
                                                                          —      annul the Decision of 4 Mars 2003 of the Merger Task
                                                                                 Force of the European Commission.
                         (2003/C 184/84)
                                                                          —      annul the Decision of 16 April 2003 of the Merger Task
                                                                                 Force of the European Commission.
                   (Language of the case: French)
                                                                          —      annul the Decision of 24 April 2003 of the Merger Task
                                                                                 Force of the European Commission.
An action against the Commission of the European Commu-                   —      annul the refusal of the Commission to review the
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                     arrangement of the divestiture of the shareholding of
European Communities on 30 April 2003 by Michael Cwik,                           Volvo in Scania and enforce an immediate divestiture as
residing at Tervuren, Belgium, represented by N. Lhoëst, lawyer,                 requested during the meeting of the 20th February 2003
with an address for service in Luxembourg.                                       and put on in the letter of the 21st February 2003.