CELEX: C2003/146/80
Language: en
Date: 2003-06-21 00:00:00
Title: Case T-145/03: Action brought on 23 April 2003 by Festival Crociere SpA against the Commission of the European Communities

21.6.2003               EN                           Official Journal of the European Union                                              C 146/45
Action brought on 23 April 2003 by Festival Crociere SpA                     —      second, that the Commission has not correctly assessed
against the Commission of the European Communities                                  certain specific economic factors mentioned in Para-
                                                                                    graph 11 of the decision, concerning in particular:
                                                                                    continued competition from other operators, prospects
                          (Case T-145/03)                                           of growth in the market, barriers to entry and the real
                                                                                    prospects of competing with Carnival/P&O’s dominance
                                                                                    in the market. The Commission not only failed to base its
                          (2003/C 146/80)                                           conclusions on a coherent objective justification, but also
                                                                                    failed to appraise, as is essential in this case, the effects of
                                                                                    the new financial structure of the dual-listed company
                     (Language of the case: Italian)                                with reference to the main competitive factors. Had the
                                                                                    Commission properly analysed these, it would not have
                                                                                    confined itself to referring, without further reflection, to
                                                                                    the first decision, but would have reconsidered the
                                                                                    assessments made at the time of the first decision, or at
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                           least commenced an in-depth enquiry.
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 23 April 2003 by Festival Crociere
SpA, represented by Professor G.M. Roberti, G. Bellitti and
I. Perego, lawyers.
The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     annul the contested decision;                                          Action brought on 6 May 2003 by Nuova Agricast S.r.l.
                                                                               against the Commission of the European Communities
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.
                                                                                                       (Case T-151/03)
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                                        (2003/C 146/81)
                                                                                                 (Language of the case: Italian)
By this action the applicant company challenges the Com-
mission’s Decision of 10 February 2003 authorising, pursuant
to Article 6(1)(b) of Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89, a concen-
tration between Carnival Cruises and P&O Princess II.
                                                                             An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                             ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
In support of its claims the applicant submits:                              European Communities on 6 May 2003 by Nuova Agricast
                                                                             S.r.l., represented by Michele Arcangelo Calabrese, avvocato.
—     first, that the Commission has not correctly appraised the
      new corporate structure arising from the merger or its
      economic and financial implications. The Commission                    The applicant claims that the Court should:
      should have found that the structure of the dual-listed
      company was, of itself, capable of conferring very signifi-
      cant competitive advantages on Carnival, including                     —      Annul the contested measures;
      advantages in terms of financial strength, likely to give it
      overwhelming power on the market such that other                       —      Order the European Commission to pay the costs.
      operators would no longer be able to compete. From this
      point of view the decision appears to be vitiated by a
      manifest error of assessment, as well as an inadequate
      statement of reasons in that the Commission failed to
      consider an essential fact which must be taken into                    Pleas in law and main arguments
      account in order properly to evaluate the competition
      aspects of the concentration. Had that fact been properly
      examined, it would necessarily have led the Commission
      to prohibit the concentration or, at least, to initiate an             The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those
      in-depth enquiry under Article 6(1)(c) of Regulation                   invoked in Case T-139/03 Nuova Agricast S.r.l. v Commission
      No 4064/89;                                                            of the European Communities (1).