CELEX: C1996/210/45
Language: en
Date: 1996-07-20 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 13 May 1996 by Kish Glass Company Limited against Commission of the European Communities (Case T-65/96)

20 . 7 . 96           EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                No C 210/ 17
applicant to the Translation Service of that institution and,          ( Netherlands ), represented by Martijn van Empel, of the
second, for her immediate reassignment to the post which               Amsterdam Bar, and Thomas Janssens, of the Brussels Bar,
she occupied at the Office for Official Publications of the            with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers
European Communities — the President of the Court of                   of Marc Loesch , 11 rue Goethe, v . Commission of
First Instance made an order on 22 April 1 996 , the operative         the European Communities ( Agent: Wouter Wils ) —
part of which is as follows :                                          application for suspension of operation of Commission
                                                                       Decision 95/55 1 /EC of 29 November 1995 relating to a
1 , the application for interim measures is dismissed;                 proceeding pursuant to Article 85 of the EC Treaty
                                                                       ( IV.34.179 , 34.202 , 216 — Stichting Certificatie
2,   the costs are reserved.
                                                                       Kraanverhuurbedrijf and the Federatie Nederlandse
                                                                       Kraanverhuurbedrijven, OJ No L 312 , 1995 , p . 79 ), and for
                                                                       access to the file opened in the context of that proceeding —
                                                                       the President of the Court of First Instance made an order on
                                                                       4 June 1996 , the operative part of which is as follows :
               ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT
                                                                       1 , the application for interim measures is dismissed;
          OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                                                                       2,   the costs are reserved.
                        of 3 June 1996
in Case T-41 /96 R Bayer AG v. Commission of the
                    European Communities
                         ( 96/C 210/43 )
               (Language of the case: German)                          Action brought on 13 May 1996 by Kish Glass Company
                                                                       Limited against Commission of the European
                                                                                                   Communities
In Case T-41 /96 R : Bayer AG, with its registered office at
Leverkusen ( Germany ), represented by Joachim Sedemund ,                                       ( Case T-65 /96 )
of .the Cologne Bar, with an address for service in                                               ( 96/C 210/45 )
Luxembourg at the Chambers of Aloyse May , 31
Grand-rue, against the Commission of the European
                                                                                       (Language of the case: English)
Communities ( Agents : Wouter Wils and Klaus Wiedner ) —
application for suspension of the operation of Article 2 of
the Commission Decision of 10 January 199 6 relating                   An action against the Commission of the European
to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EC Treaty                      Communities was brought before the Court of First
(IV/34.279/F3 : Adalat ) — the President of the Court of First         Instance of the European Communities on 13 May 1996 by
Instance made an order on 3 June 1 996 , the operative part of         Kish Glass Company Limited, represented by Maurice
which is as follows :                                                   Byrne, Solicitor, with an address for service in Luxembourg
                                                                       at the Chambers of Arendt & Medernach, 8— 10 , rue
                                                                       Mathias Hardt .
 1 , operation of Article 2 of the decision is suspended;
2,   costs are reserved.
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should :
                                                                       — annul the decision of the Commission dated 2 1 February
                                                                            1996 in Case IV/34.193~Kish Glass,
                                                                       — order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs .
               ORDER OF THE PRESIDENT
          OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments
                        of 4 June 1996                                  The applicant, an Irish undertaking with limited liability,
 in      Case     T-18/96       R:      Stichting     Certificatie      which supplies glass products to all levels of trade ,
 Kraanverhuurbedrijf         and      Federatie      Nederlandse        challenges the Commission's refusal to take any action in
 Kraanverhuurbedrijven v. Commission of the European                    relation to its complaint concerning its supplier's abuse of a
                           Communities                                  dominant position . The abuse consisted in applying
                          ( 96/C 210/44 )                               dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with trading
                                                                        parties other than the applicant and restricting the supply of
                                                                        float glass to the applicant in 1987.
                 (Language of the case: Dutch)
                                                                        In the applicant's view, the contested decision should be
 In      Case     T-18/96       R:      Stichting      Certificatie     annulled on the following grounds :
 Kraanverhuurbedrijf,         established      at     Culemborg
 ( Netherlands )       and         Federatie         Nederlandse        — Infringement of an essential procedural requirement and
 Kraanverhuurbedrijven,         established     at Culemborg                of the rights of the defence . The Commission did not give
 ---pagebreak--- No C 210/ 18          EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                    20 . 7 . 96
   the applicant the opportunity to comment on the replies          Action brought on 14 May 1996 by Dimitrios Polivios,
   received from Irish glass companies to the Article 1 1           residing in Piraeus, against the European Union and the
   request for information made by the Commission itself.                   Commission of the European Communities
   Those replies contained important information relating                                  ( Case T-68/96 )
   to the applicant's arguments and were communicated to
   its counsel on various dates, the final replies being                                     ( 96/C 210/46 )
   received on 12 February 1996 . Since the contested
   decision was adopted on 21 February, the
   aforementioned replies therefore formed the basis for                           (Language of the case: Greek)
   it .
                                                                    An action against the European Union and the Commission
                                                                    of the European Communities was brought before the
— Infringement of an essential procedural requirement and           Court of First Instance of the European Communities on
   of the right to a fair hearing. In addressing a request for      14 May 1996 by Dimitrios Polivios , residing in Piraeus,
   information, which was not drafted in fair and objective         represented by Konstantinos Zangas, of the Athens Bar,
  terms, to the party which was the subject of the                  with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers
  complaint, the Commission violated the basic                      of Catherine Thill-Camitaki, 15 Avenue du Bois .
  procedural guarantees provided by Community law and
  the applicant's right to a fair hearing. It is apparent from
  that request for information that the Commission had             The applicant claims that the Court should :
  effectively made up its mind on the applicant's
  complaint and investigated the matter purely for the
  sake of form . For this reason, the investigation was not        — déclaré his action admissible ,
  carried out with due care , seriousness and diligence .
                                                                   — require the defendants to pay him ECU 510 840 or, in
                                                                        the alternative ECU 425 700, with legal interest from
                                                                        8 August 1993 until the claim is settled,
— Infringement of an essential procedural requirement and
  of the principle of legal certainty, in so far as the
  Commission adopted the contested decision in the form            — order the defendant to pay the costs .
  of a covering letter signed by the Commissioner for
  competition, summarizing the procedure which led to
  the rejection of the complaint and referring, for the            Pleas in law and main arguments
  reasoning of the decision, to a separate document. As a
  result of this unusual form, the applicant has no way of
  knowing if the competent Commissioner ever saw or                The applicant, the owner of a fishing vessel registered in
  adopted the reasoning for rejecting its complaint or even        Piraeus, transferred ownership of his vessel to a joint
  if the reasoning existed in written form at the time when        enterprise in Senegal , and requested payment of the
  the Commissioner signed the covering letter .                    Community financial aid provided to that effect in Council
                                                                   Regulation ( EEC ) No 3944/90 ( OJ No L 380, 1990,
                                                                   P - D­
                                                                   He claims that in the calculation of that aid he suffered
— Manifest error of appraisal . According to the applicant,
  the Commission incorrectly defined the relevant product          damage, since the competent services of the European Union
  market as the market for float glass, because the                and of Greece, as a result of serious negligence , did not take
  structure of supply and conditions of competition in the         into account the tonnage of the vessel resulting from the
  market for 4 mm float glass are different from the               application of the rules on tonnage measurement provided
  structure of supply and conditions of competition in the         in the London Convention, but rather the much smaller
  market for other thicknesses of float glass . Furthermore,       tonnage resulting from application of the Greek rules on
                                                                   measurement .
  the Commission should have considered Ireland, and
  not the whole Community , as the relevant geographical
  market, given the particular conditions of competition
                                                                   He claims that the European Union should compensate him
  prevalent in the Irish market for 4 mm float glass .
                                                                   by paying in full the additional aid which would have been
                                                                   paid had the measurement been carried out on the basis of
                                                                   the London Convention or, at least, a proportion of the
                                                                   amount of the additional aid , in view of the fact that part of
                                                                   the aid is granted from national funds .