CELEX: C1998/299/34
Language: en
Date: 1998-09-26 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 29 July 1998 by the Commission of the European Communities against the French Republic (Case C-296/98)

26.9.98               EN                Official Journal of the European Communities                                  C 299/21
directives for their implementation. In the present case,          the European Communities was brought before the Court
when the time limits expired, the Italian Republic had not         of Justice of the European Communities on 29 July 1998
adopted the measures necessary to comply with the                  by Metsä-Serla OYJ and Others, represented by Hans
Directives named in the Commission's application.                  Hellmann, Am Morsdorfer Hof 16, D-50933 Cologne,
                                                                   and Hans-Joachim Hellmann LL.M., Schilling, Zutt &
(1) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995, p. 52.                                    Anschütz, Otto-Beck Straûe 42, D-68165 Mannheim,
(2) OJ L 49, 28.2.1996, p. 29.                                     Rechtsanwälte, with an address for service in Luxembourg
                                                                   at the Chambers of Loesch & Wolter, 11 rue Goethe, B.P.
                                                                   1107, L-1011 Luxembourg.
                                                                   The appellants claim that the Court should:
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Juzgado de               1. declare void, in so far as it concerns the appellants, the
Primera Instancia e Instrucción No 5, Oviedo, by order of              Commission Decision of 13 July 1994 relating to a
that Court of 1 June 1998 in the Case of Entidad de                    proceeding under Article 85 of the EC Treaty (IV/C
Gestión de Derechos de los Productores Audiovisuales                   33.833 Ð Cartonboard), notified to the appellants on
      (EGEDA) v. Hostelería Asturiana, SA (HOASA)                      8 August 1994 and published in the Official Journal
                       (Case C-293/98)                                 of the European Communities of 19 September 1994;
                         (98/C 299/32)
                                                                   2. order the Commission to pay the costs.
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Juzgado de                 Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Primera Instancia e Instrucción (Court of First Instance)
No 5, Oviedo, of 1 June 1998, which was received at the            Infringement of Community law: there is no legal basis for
Court Registry on 29 July 1998, for a preliminary ruling           an order that the appellants should bear joint and several
in the Case of Entidad de Gestión de Derechos de los               liability for the fine imposed on Finnboard. Article 15(2)
Productores Audiovisuales (EGEDA) v. Hostelería                    of Council Regulation No 17 does not impose liability for
Asturiana, SA (HOASA), on the following question.                  infringements of third parties. Neither the Commission
                                                                   nor the Court of First Instance found that the appellants
Must Article 1(2)(a) and (3) of Directive 93/83/EEC (1) be         had themselves infringed Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty.
interpreted as meaning that the reception by a hotel               The Court's view that an undertaking may be held jointly
establishment of satellite or terrestrial television signals       and severally liable for payment of a fine where the
and their retransmission by cable to the various rooms of          Commission finds in the same instrument that the
the hotel is an act of communication to the public' or            infringement could have been established also in the case
reception by the public'?                                         of that undertaking infringes the principle of nulla poena
                                                                   sine lege, or the prohibition which follows by analogy
                                                                   from that principle, and the principle of the presumption
(1) OJ L 248, 6.10.1993, p. 15.                                    of innocence; it is incompatible with the principles of the
                                                                   rule of law and contravenes the appellants' fundamental
                                                                   rights of defence.
                                                                   The Court of First Instance wrongly relies on the case-law
                                                                   of the Court of Justice on the determination of fines in
Appeal brought on 29 July 1998 by Metsä-Serla OYJ,                 regard to undertakings which form an economic unit.
UPM-Kymmene OYJ (formerly United Paper Mills Ltd),                 Joint and several liability cannot be derived from the
Tamrock OY (formerly Tampella Corporation) and Kyro                principles of economic unity. Moreover, the preconditions
OYJ ABP (formerly OY Kyro AB) against the judgment                 for a finding that there was economic unity do not exist.
delivered on 14 May 1998 by the Third Chamber
(extended composition) of the Court of First Instance of
the European Communities in Joined Cases T-339/94,
T-340/94, T-341/94 and T-342/94 Metsä-Serla OYJ and
Others against the Commission of the European
                          Communities
                      (Case C-294/98 P)                            Action brought on 29 July 1998 by the Commission of the
                                                                       European Communities against the French Republic
                         (98/C 299/33)
                                                                                          (Case C-296/98)
                                                                                           (98/C 299/34)
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 14 May
1998 by the Third Chamber (extended composition) of the
Court of First Instance of the European Communities in             An action against the French Republic was brought before
Joined Cases T-339/94, T-340/94, T-341/94 and T-342/94             the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
Metsä-Serla OYJ and Others against the Commission of               29 July 1998 by the Commission of the European
 ---pagebreak--- C 299/22               EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                   26.9.98
Communities, represented by Christina Tufvesson, Legal               Appeal brought on 29 July 1998 by SCA Holding Ltd
Adviser, and Bernard Mongin, of its Legal Service, acting            against the judgment delivered on 14 May 1998 by the
as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at              Third Chamber, extended composition, of the Court of
the office of Carlos Gómez de la Cruz, Wagner Centre,                First Instance of the European Communities in Case
Kirchberg.                                                           T-327/94 (1) between SCA Holding Ltd and the
                                                                              Commission of the European Communities
The Commission of the European Communities claims                                          (Case C-297/98 P)
that the Court should:
                                                                                             (98/C 299/35)
Ð declare that, by maintaining in force Articles L 310-8
    and A 310-1 of the Code des Assurances (Insurance                An appeal against the judgment delivered on 14 May
    Code), according to which:                                       1998 by the Third Chamber, extended composition, of the
                                                                     Court of First Instance of the European Communities in
    (a) insurance and capitalisation undertakings are
                                                                     Case T-327/94 between SCA Holding Ltd and the
           required, when marketing a standard form
                                                                     Commission of the European Communities, was brought
           insurance contract for the first time in France, to
                                                                     before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
           notify it to the Minister responsible for economic
                                                                     on 29 July 1998 by SCA Holding Ltd, whose registered
           and financial affairs in accordance with the
                                                                     office is at SCA Packaging House, 543 New Hythe Lane,
           conditions laid down by order issued by that
                                                                     Larkfield, Aylesford, Kent ME20 7PE, United Kingdom,
           Minister;
                                                                     represented by John Pheasant and Nicholas Bromfield,
    (b) the information referred to in the first paragraph           solicitors of the Supreme Court of England and Wales, of
           of Article L 310-8 is to take the form of a note          Lovell White Durrant, with an address for service in
           drawn up in the French language containing the            Luxembourg at the Chambers of Loesch & Wolter, 11, rue
           information mentioned in the Annex to that                Goethe.
           Article,
                                                                     The appellant claims that the Court should:
    the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
    under the Treaty establishing the European                       (a) set aside the judgment of the Court of First Instance
    Community, under Articles 6(3), 29 and 39 of Council                   of the European Communities in Case T-327/94, SCA
    Directive 92/49/EEC of 18 June 1992 on the                             Holding Ltd v. Commission of the European
    coordination of laws, regulations and administrative                   Communities, of 14 May 1998;
    provisions relating to direct insurance other than life
    assurance and amending Directives 73/239/EEC and
    88/357/EEC (third non-life insurance Directive) (1) and          (b) annul Article 1 of Commission Decision 94/601/EC
    under Articles 5(3), 29 and 39 of Council Directive                    of 13 July 1994, as amended by Commission
    92/96/EEC of 10 November 1992 on the coordination                      Decision C(94) 2135 of 26 July 1994, relating to a
    of laws, regulations and administrative provisions                     proceeding under Article 85 of the EC Treaty (IV/C/
    relating to direct life assurance and amending                         33.833 Ð Cartonboard) (2), in so far as it concerns
    Directives 79/267/EEC and 90/619/EEC (third life                       the appellant, or, in the alternative, annul or
    assurance Directive) (2),                                              substantially reduce the fine imposed on the appellant
                                                                           at Article 3 thereof;
Ð order the French Republic to pay the costs.
                                                                     (c)   order that the Commission should bear the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                     Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
The Commission considers that the provisions of Articles
L 310-8 and A 310-1 of the French Insurance Code are
                                                                     The legal pleas of SCA Holding Ltd fall into two
not in accordance with the obligations imposed on the
                                                                     categories, those which relate to the issue of the proper
Member States by the third life assurance and non-life
                                                                     addressee of the Cartonboard Decision and those which
assurance Directives, in that they require the systematic
                                                                     relate to the fines imposed.
notification of the general conditions of contracts which
insurance undertakings wish to market for the first time
on French territory. That practice is tantamount to a                Addressee of the Decision:
hidden regime of systematic control. French law does not
require the prior approval of general and special policy             The Court of First Instance's findings on this question
conditions, of scales of premiums or of forms, but it does           raise the following issues of law:
provide for the systematic notification of general
conditions      governing      contracts   which     insurance       (a) whether the Court of First Instance was right to
undertakings wish to market for the first time on French                   conclude that no question of succession arose in the
territory.                                                                 circumstances of this case,
(1) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 360, 9.12.1992, p. 1.                                       (b) whether the Court of First Instance was right to
                                                                           consider that the Commission had a choice of
                                                                           addressee, and, if so