CELEX: C2001/079/39
Language: en
Date: 2001-03-10 00:00:00
Title: Case T-354/00: Action brought on 23 November 2000 by Métropole Télévision (M6) against Commission of the European Communities

C 79/22                  EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                       10.3.2001
                                                          COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
Action brought on 23 November 2000 by Métropole                            —     The existence, in the present case, of a manifest error of
Télévision (M6) against Commission of the European                               assessment, inasmuch as:
                             Communities
                                                                                 —     the current circumstances have changed from those
                           (Case T-354/00)                                             prevailing in December 1997. Such a change
                                                                                       involves, in particular, the adoption on 3 April
                                                                                       1998, of new membership conditions as well as of
                            (2001/C 79/39)                                             new rules fixing the criteria for the interpretation of
                                                                                       Article 3(3) of the EBU Statutes;
                     (Language of the case: French)                              —     the complaint of 6 March 2000 does not reproduce
                                                                                       the terms or arguments of the first complaint of 5
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                              December 1997, the rejection of which formed
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the                             the subject-matter of Case T-206/99 Métropole
European Communities on 23 November 2000 by Métropole                                  Télévision v Commission (3).
Télévision (M6), established in Neuilly-sur-Seine (France), rep-
resented by Didier Téophile, of the Paris Bar.
                                                                           (1) Joined Cases T-528/93, T-542/93, T-543/93, T-543/93,
                                                                               T-546/93, T-546/93 Métropole Télévision and Others v Com-
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                    mission [1996] ECR II-649.
                                                                           (2) OJ 1998 L 354, p. 18.
—     annul in its entirety the decision of the Commission of              (3) OJ 1999 C 333, p. 33.
      12 September 2000 in Case COMP/C2/37.825 (M6) v
      European Broadcasting Union (EBU);
—     Order the Commission to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicant company observes that, on 13 July 2000 it                    Action brought on 6 December 2000 by N.V. Master
brought an action against the exemption decision of the                    Foods against the Commission of the European Communi-
Commission of 10 May 2000 by which it declared the                                                         ties
provisions of Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty inapplicable for
the period 26 February 1993 to 31 December 2005 to certain
                                                                                                    (Case T-370/00)
EBU agreements. That decision is in line with the judgment of
the Court of First Instance of 11 July 1996 (1) and the new
rules which the EBU subsequently adopted, supplementing                                              (2001/C 79/40)
and amending its Statutes. In that regard, the applicant claims
to find itself in a situation in which, pending the next judgment
of the Court of First Instance, the EBU is benefiting from a
situation in which the Commission expressly states that the                                   (Language of the case: English)
new membership conditions do not result in a restriction of
competition. That is why M6 was forced to lodge a complaint                An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
on 6 March 2000, the rejection of which is now the subject-                ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
matter of the present action, seeking a declaration from the               European Communities on 6 December 2000 by N.V. Master
Commission prohibiting the new EBU membership conditions                   Foods, a company incorporated under Belgian law, represented
and the rules supplementing them.                                          by Laurent Ruessmann and Ivo Onkelinx of De Bandt, Van
                                                                           Hecke, Lagae & Loesch, Brussels (Belgium).
In support of its arguments, the applicant alleges:
                                                                           The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     Breach of essential procedural requirements in that the
      Commission disregarded the procedural rules introduced
      by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2842/98 of 22 De-                   —     annul the Commission Decision set out in the DG Budget
      cember 1998 on the hearing of parties in certain proceed-                  letter of 29 September 2000, as regards the determination
      ings under Articles 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty, (2) by                     of the import prices and resulting amount of definitive
      sending M6, in reply to its complaint of 6 March 2000, a                   duties due by the applicant under the CRS; and
      definitive rejection, without giving it the opportunity
      beforehand of making known its views.                                —     order the Commission to pay the costs.