CELEX: C2003/112/80
Language: en
Date: 2003-05-10 00:00:00
Title: Case T-94/03: Action brought on 10 March 2003 by Ferriere Nord S.p.A. against the Commission of the European Communities

C 112/42              EN                         Official Journal of the European Union                                        10.5.2003
Action brought on 5 March 2003 by Luis Escobar Guer-                     The applicant claims that the Court should:
rero against the Commission of the European Communi-
                               ties                                      —     annul the decision of the Commission rejecting the
                                                                               applicant’s candidacy for the post of Grade A 2 as
                         (Case T-92/03)                                        Director of DG INFSO/A: ‘Information Services: policy
                                                                               and regulation’;
                        (2003/C 112/78)                                  —     annul the decision of the Commission of 29 March 2002;
                  (Language of the case: French)                         —     order the defendant to pay the costs.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                Pleas in law and main arguments
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 5 March 2003 by Luis Escobar                     The applicant, an official of the Commission, objects to the
Guerrero, residing in Luxembourg, represented by Albert                  Commission’s decision to reject his candidacy for the post of
Coolen, Jean-Noël Louis, Étienne Marchal and Sébastien Orlan-            Grade A 2 as Director of DG INFSO/A: ‘Information Services:
di, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg.                  policy and regulation’.
The applicant claims that the Court should:                              In support of his application, the applicant alleges:
—     annul the Commission’s decision not to include the                 —     breach of the obligation to provides reasons;
      applicant’s name on the list of officials promoted to
      Grade A5 for promotions round 2002, a decision which               —     infringement of Article 4, Article 7, the third paragraph
      results from the publication in ‘Informations administrat-               of Article 27, Article 26(1)(a) and Article 45 of the Staff
      ives’ No 40-2002 of 17 May 2002;                                         Regulations;
—     order the defendant to pay the costs.                              —     breach of the principle of equal treatment and non-
                                                                               discrimination;
                                                                         —     manifest error of assessment;
Pleas in law and main arguments
                                                                         —     infringement of the rules of conduct adopted by the
                                                                               Commission for filling of posts at grades A 1 and A 2.
In support of his application, the applicant alleges breach of
the obligation to state reasons. He also alleges breach of
Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and of the principle of equal        Furthermore, he claims that the professional requirements for
treatment, of the principle that an official is entitled to              the post, as set down in the notice of vacancy, are unlawful
reasonable career prospects and of the principles of proper              inasmuch as they are not directed at securing the services of
administration and sound management.                                     officials of the highest standard of ability, efficiency and
                                                                         integrity in relation to the duties to be performed.
Action brought on 4 March 2003 by Spyros Konidaris
                                                                         Action brought on 10 March 2003 by Ferriere Nord S.p.A.
  against the Commission of the European Communities
                                                                           against the Commission of the European Communities
                         (Case T-93/03)                                                            (Case T-94/03)
                        (2003/C 112/79)                                                           (2003/C 112/80)
                  (Language of the case: French)                                             (Language of the case: Italian)
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-                An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the               ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 4 March 2003 by Spyros Konidaris,                European Communities on 10 March 2003 by Ferriere Nord
residing in Overijse (Belgium), represented by Albert Coolen,            S.p.A., represented by Wilma Viscardini, Gabriele Donà and
Jean-Noël Louis and Étienne Marchal, lawyers.                            Elena Perricone, lawyers.
 ---pagebreak--- 10.5.2003              EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                         C 112/43
The applicant claims that the Court should:                                The applicant claims that the Court should:
—     principally, annul pursuant to Article 230 EC the decision
                                                                           —     annul the Commission Decision of 13 November 2002
      of the Commission of the European Communities of
                                                                                 in which it was decided not to raise any objections to
      17 December 2002 C(2002) 5087 final, by which the
                                                                                 the Disposición Transitoria Primera (First Transitional
      applicant was ordered to pay a fine of EUR 3 750 000,00
                                                                                 Provision) of Real Decreto Ley 6/2000 de Medidas
      at the end of a proceeding pursuant to Article 65 of the
                                                                                 Urgentes de Intensificación de la Competencia en Merca-
      ECSC Treaty (Case COMP/37.956 — Round bar steel for
                                                                                 dos de Bienes y Servicios (Royal Decree Law on Emer-
      reinforced concrete);
                                                                                 gency Measures to Promote Competition in Markets for
                                                                                 Goods and Services);
—     failing that, annul in part Decision C(2002) 5087 final,
      with a consequential reduction of the fine,
                                                                           —     order the Commission to pay the costs.
—     in any event, order the Commission of the European
      Communities to pay the costs.
                                                                           Pleas in law and main arguments
Pleas in law and main arguments
This action is directed against the same decision as that                  The applicants in the present action, which represent almost
challenged in Case T-27/03 (S.P. v Commission). The pleas in               all the existing service stations in Spain, are challenging the
law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in                 Commission’s failure to take action in respect of the exemption
that case. In addition to breach of rights of the defence, in that         of certain hypermarkets from the requirement to obtain
the communication of the Commission’s complaints did not                   permission from the authorities to vary the planning restric-
take into consideration whether there was any effect on intra-             tions on building and usage, an exemption introduced into
Community trade, the applicant alleges that the Commission                 Spanish law by the First Transitional Provision of Royal Decree
made an incorrect assessment of the length of its participation            Law No 6/2000 of 23 June on Emergency Measures to
in the agreement, decision or concerted practice, and of the               Promote Competition in Markets for Goods and Services. The
base prices, the prices of the ‘extra’ in terms of dimension and           stated objective of that exemption, which the applicants
the limitation of production and/or sales.                                 consider amounts to aid, was to facilitate the establishment of
                                                                           service stations on the premises of those hypermarkets, thereby
                                                                           promoting increased competition in the market for the retail
                                                                           supply of petroleum products in Spain.
                                                                           The Decision at issue in this action confirms that the disputed
                                                                           measure does not amount to State aid, since it does not entail
Action brought on 8 March 2003 by the Asociación de                        a transfer of State resources.
Empresarios de Estaciones de Servicio de la Comunidad
Autónoma de Madrid and the Federación Catalana de
Estaciones de Servicio against the Commission of the
                     European Communities                                  In support of their claims, the applicants submit:
                         (Case T-95/03)                                    —     that the measure at issue increases the value of the
                                                                                 beneficiaries’ property is immediately and without their
                                                                                 providing consideration and entails an exceptional
                        (2003/C 112/81)                                          reclassification of the land on which the hypermarkets are
                                                                                 located, abolishes the charges, costs and administrative
                   (Language of the case: Spanish)                               procedures which are necessary under normal circum-
                                                                                 stances if a service station is to be opened and also
                                                                                 entails the State’s surrender of its right to receive the
                                                                                 consideration in money or money’s worth which would
                                                                                 normally be applicable.
An action against the Commission of the European Communi-
ties was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 8 March 2003 by the Asociación                     —     Manifest error of assessment on the Commission’s part in
de Empresarios de Estaciones de Servicio de la Comunidad                         that it carried out an incomplete and incorrect analysis of
Autónoma de Madrid and the Federación Catalana de Estacion-                      the national planning legislation, which vitiates the
es de Servicio, both established in Madrid, represented by José                  Decision as regards the transfer of State resources and the
María Jiménez Laiglesia and Marta Delgado Echevarría.                            ensuing interpretation of Article 87(1) EC.