CELEX: C1999/086/56
Language: en
Date: 1999-03-27 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 25 January 1999 by VASA Energy GmbH & Co. KG against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-29/99)

C 86/32               EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                 27.3.1999
    from outside the institution who, in the applicant's            Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
    opinion, had already been pre-selected, regardless of
    the suitability or otherwise of candidates inside the
    institution;
                                                                    The applicants in the present case are Greene King PLC's
                                                                    (GK) tenants at the Fox and Hounds Public House at
                                                                    Kempston in Bedfordshire. GK is a UK brewer and
Ð infringement of Article 45(1) of the Staff Regulations
                                                                    wholesaler. The applicants entered into their lease with
    in that the appointing authority did not undertake a
                                                                    GK for a tenancy, which contained an exclusive beer
    detailed comparative examination of candidatures and
                                                                    purchasing agreement in terms which are standard in the
    attributed unlawful decisive importance to the
                                                                    UK, namely a obligation to buy beer exclusively from GK
    recommendations' of the Advisory Committee for
                                                                    or its nominees.
    Selection Procedures;
Ð arbitrariness and manifest error of assessment;                   On 23 May 1997 the applicants requested that the
                                                                    Commission hold that GK, by its network of beer supply
                                                                    agreements in the UK, infringed Article 85 of the EC
Ð misuse of powers and breach of Article 7(1) and                   Treaty. The current application challenges the formal
    Article 27 of the Staff Regulations;                            Commission's rejection of this complaint.
Ð infringement of Article 5(3) of the Staff Regulations
                                                                    The applicants seek the annulment of the contested
    and of the principle of non-discrimination;
                                                                    decision on the grounds that the defendant failed
Ð infringement of the principle of transparency of
    administrative measures.                                        Ð properly to evaluate the facts and law which establish
                                                                        the existence of an infringement of Article 85 by GK;
                                                                    Ð to give adequate reasons for its decision rejecting the
                                                                        complaint; and
Action brought on 22 January 1999 by Colin Arthur
Roberts and Valerie Ann Roberts against the Commission
                of the European Communities                         Ð properly to evaluate the existence of an infringement
                                                                        of Article 85 by reason of a price fixing cartel in the
                        (Case T-25/99)
                                                                        UK brewing industry operating at wholesale level.
                        (1999/C 86/55)
               (Language of the case: English)
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                   Action brought on 25 January 1999 by VASA Energy
Instance of the European Communities on 22 January                  GmbH & Co. KG against the Commission of the
1999 by Colin Arthur Roberts and Valerie Ann Roberts,                                 European Communities
Kempston in Bedfordshire (United Kingdom), represented                                     (Case T-29/99)
by Becket Bedford of the Middle Temple, S. C. I.
Ferdinand and J. Tracy Kelly of Ferdinand Kelly,                                          (1999/C 86/56)
Solicitors, 21 Bennetts Hill, Birmingham B2 5QP (United
Kingdom).
                                                                                  (Language of the case: German)
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                    An action against the Commission of the European
Ð annul the decision of the Commission in Case IV/                  Communities was brought before the Court of First
    36.511/F3 Ð Roberts/Greene King dated 12 November               Instance of the European Communities on 25 January
    1998;                                                           1999 by VASA Energy GmbH & Co. KG, Hamburg,
                                                                    represented by Dörte Annemarie Fouquet, Rechtsanwältin,
                                                                    of Messrs Kuhbier & Fouquet, Hamburg, with an address
Ð order the Commission to pay the costs of this                     for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Messrs
    application.                                                    Arendt and Medernach, 8Ð10 Rue Mathias Hardt.
 ---pagebreak--- 27.3.1999           EN                  Official Journal of the European Communities                                   C 86/33
The applicant claims that the Court should:                        Action brought on 28 January 1999 by Bocchi Food
                                                                   Trade International GmbH against the Commission of the
                                                                                     European Communities
Ð declare that, by failing to examine the complaint made
    pursuant to Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty and                                   (Case T-30/99)
    to adopt a decision on the basis of that examination
    within two months after receiving from the applicant,                                 (1999/C 86/57)
    by letter of 15 September 1998, a formal request to
    that effect made in accordance with Article 175 of the
    EC Treaty, the Commission has infringed Article 175                          (Language of the case: German)
    of the EC Treaty;
Ð order the Commission to pay the costs, including those           An action against the Commission of the European
    incurred by the applicant, even if the Court takes the         Communities was brought before the Court of First
    view that, following the institution of the proceedings,       Instance of the European Communities on 28 January
    the Commission has taken steps in the matter which             1999 by Bocchi Food Trade International GmbH, Bergisch
    render the action devoid of purpose.                           Gladbach (Germany), represented by Gert Meier,
                                                                   Rechtsanwalt, Jakordenstraûe 10, Köln.
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The applicant is a private company incorporated under              The applicant claims that the Court should:
German law. Its object is the production and marketing of
heat and energy and the provision of all services
connected therewith. It operates within and outside                1. order the Commission to compensate the applicant for
Germany. A significant majority interest in the applicant              its loss suffered through the competent authorities'
company is held by the Swedish power supplier,                         reducing its provisional reference quantity by applying
Vattenfall.
By letter of 15 September 1998 the applicant requested                 (a) the adjustment coefficient, and
the Commission, with reference to previous written
communications, to examine, pursuant to Articles 92 and
93 of the EC Treaty, the acquisition of Saarbergwerke AG               (b) the reduction coefficient;
and Preussag Anthrazit GmbH by Ruhrkohle AG, with a
view to ascertaining whether, as a result of and in
connection with that amalgamation, circumstances                   2. order the Commission, in so far as the applicant's
relating to aid had arisen which were compulsorily                     provisional reference quantity has been wrongly
notifiable. Although the applicant had expressly warned                reduced by applying the adjustment coefficient, to
the Commission of its intention to bring an action, the                compensate for that reduction by granting the
two-month period within which the Commission was                       applicant    additional    licences   in    the   future
required to act elapsed without any decision being issued              (compensation in kind);
which would have averted the claim of failure by the
Commission to act.
                                                                   3. order the Commission to pay the costs.
The applicant maintains that, once the Commission
became aware of the planned amalgamation in February
1998, it was under a duty not only to approve the
acquisition of Saarbergwerke in the light of Article 66 of         Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
the ECSC Treaty but also, and in parallel, to carry out an
examination to determine whether aid existed within the
meaning of Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty. However,
                                                                   The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as in
the Commission failed to carry out that examination.
                                                                   Case T-18/99 Cordis Obst- und Gemüsegrosshandel
                                                                   GmbH v. Commission.