CELEX: C2002/156/61
Language: en
Date: 2002-06-29 00:00:00
Title: Case T-102/02: Action brought on 5 April 2002 by EVC International N.V. against the Commission of the European Communities

C 156/32               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                     29.6.2002
The applicant claims that the Court should:                               Action brought on 5 April 2002 by EVC International N.V.
                                                                          against the Commission of the European Communities
—     annul under Article 230 of the EC Treaty the Commission
                                                                                                  (Case T-102/02)
      Decision in case no. COMP/M.2533-BP/E.ON in its
      entirety and/or insofar it concerns the market for the
      supply of merchant ethylene;
                                                                                                  (2002/C 156/61)
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.                                                 (Language of the case: English)
                                                                          An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
                                                                          ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
Pleas in law and main arguments                                           European Communities on 5 April 2002 by EVC International
                                                                          N.V., represented by Mr Julian Ellison, Mr Mark Clough QC
                                                                          and Mr Matthew Hall of Ashurst Morris Crisp, Brussels
                                                                          (Belgium).
The applicant in the present case is a purchaser of merchant
ethylene on the ARG+ pipeline network in Belgium, the
                                                                          The applicant claims that the Court should:
Netherlands and western Germany.
                                                                          —     annul under Article 230 of the EC Treaty the Commission
                                                                                Decision in case no. COMP/M.2533-BP/E.ON in its
                                                                                entirety and/or insofar it concerns the market for the
The applicant contests the Decision of the Commission                           supply of merchant ethylene;
declaring an operation where BP, together with E.ON, would
acquire joint control of Veba Oel under certain conditions
compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement.                  —     order the Commission to pay the costs.
These conditions were necessary since the operation gave rise
to substantial competition concerns on the ARG+ merchant
ethylene market. In particular, there was a risk of creating a
joint dominant position of BP/Veba Oel and Shell/DEA (case
no. COMP/M. 2389-Shell/DEA (1).
                                                                          Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                          The applicant in the present case is a purchaser of merchant
The decisions in the BP/E.ON case is closely related to the               ethylene outside the ARG+ pipeline network.
decision in the Shell/DEA case. These cases were treated
similarly and the remedies imposed in each case are only
effective if the remedies in the other case are operative as well.
Therefore, the applicant puts forward the same arguments as               The applicant contests the Decision of the Commission
in Case T-99/02.                                                          declaring an operation where BP, together with E.ON, would
                                                                          acquire joint control of Veba Oel under certain conditions
                                                                          compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement.
                                                                          These conditions were necessary since the operation gave rise
                                                                          to substantial competition concerns on the ARG+ merchant
                                                                          ethylene market. In particular, there was a risk of creating a
(1) Under the operation examined by the Commission in this case,          joint dominant position of BP/Veba Oel and Shell/DEA (case
    Deutsche Shell would acquire sole control of the undertaking          no. COMP/M. 2389-Shell/DEA (1).
    DEA Mineraloel. The decision in case nr COMP/M. 2389-Shell/
    DEA is also contested by this Applicant in Case T-99/02.
                                                                          The Decision in the BP/E.ON case is closely related to the
                                                                          decision in the Shell/DEA case. These cases were treated
                                                                          similarly and the remedies imposed in each case are only
                                                                          effective if the remedies in the other case are operative as well.
 ---pagebreak--- 29.6.2002               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 156/33
Therefore, the applicant puts forward the same pleas and                   The contested Decision contains, according to the applicant,
arguments as in Case T-100/02, which are again the same as                 several errors of assessment and errors in law. Firstly, the
those put forward in Case T-99/02.                                         Commission erred in concluding that the merchant supply of
                                                                           cumene to one of the applicant’s production sites does
                                                                           not constitute a separate economic market. Secondly, the
                                                                           Commission failed to consider whether a dominant position
(1) Under the operation examined by the Commission in this case,           would be created in this market and failed to conclude that
    Deutsche Shell would acquire sole control of the undertaking           a dominant position had been created. Alternatively, the
    DEA Mineraloel. The decision in case no. COMP/M. 2389-Shell/           Commission failed to define a wider relevant market for the
    DEA is also contested by this applicant in Case T-100/02.              sale of cumene and failed to analyse the creation of a dominant
                                                                           position in such a market.
                                                                           The applicant also puts forward a plea concerning the
                                                                           infringement of an essential procedural requirement, the
Action brought on 5 April 2002 by Ineos Phenol GmbH                        misuse of powers and the violation of the principle of sound
& Co KG against the Commission of the European                             administration. According to the applicant, the Commission
                           Communities                                     should have requested information from third parties in
                                                                           relation to the sale of cumene by BP and Veba Oel.
                          (Case T-103/02)
                          (2002/C 156/62)                                  Finally, the applicant claims that there was a lack of reasoning
                                                                           in the contested Decision since the Commission failed to
                                                                           analyse the supply of merchant cumene by BP and Veba Oel
                   (Language of the case: English)                         and failed to address the issues raised in the present application.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 April 2002 by Ineos Phenol
GmbH & Co KG, represented by Mr Julian Ellison, Mr Mark
Clough QC and Mr Matthew Hall of Ashurst Morris Crisp,
Brussels (Belgium).
The applicant claims that the Court should:
                                                                           Action brought on 8 April 2002 by SFT Gondrand Frères
—     annul under Article 230 of the EC Treaty the Commission
                                                                             against the Commission of the European Communities
      Decision in case no. COMP/M.2533-BP/E.ON insofar as
      it relates implicitly to the merchant supply of cumene;
—     order the Commission to pay the costs.                                                        (Case T-104/02)
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                                     (2002/C 156/63)
The applicant is a significant purchaser of a petrochemical                                   (Language of the case: French)
product called cumene from BP and Veba Oel AG.
The applicant contests the Decision of the Commission
declaring an operation where BP, together with E.ON, would
acquire joint control of Veba Oel under certain conditions
compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement.                   An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
The grounds of the present application relate to the omission of           ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
the Commission to consider, in this Decision, the competition              European Communities on April 2002 by SFT Gondrand
issues raised by the combination of BP and Veba Oel, so far as             Frères of Paris, represented by Mireille Famchon, lawyer, with
their supply of merchant cumene is concerned.                              an address for service in Luxembourg.