CELEX: 62008TN0573
Language: en
Date: 2008-12-17 00:00:00
Title: Case T-573/08: Action brought on 17 December 2008 — TF1 v Commission

7.3.2009   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 55/42
            
         Action brought on 17 December 2008 — TF1 v Commission
   (Case T-573/08)
   (2009/C 55/75)
   Language of the case: French
   Parties
   
      Applicant: Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) (represented by: J.-P. Hordies and C. Smits, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
   Form of order sought
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the Commission of 16 July 2008 in Case N 279/2008-France (Capital endowment for France Télévisions);
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Commission to initiate the formal investigation procedure under Article 88(2) EC in respect of State aid;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Commission to pay the costs.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The applicant applies for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2008) 3506 final of 16 July 2008, by which the Commission had held State aid in the form of a capital endowment of EUR 150 million in favour of France Télévisions to be compatible with the common market. The applicant requests in that context the initiation of the formal investigation procedure in accordance with Article 88(2) EC.
   In support of its application, the applicant asserts, on the substance of the case, two pleas:
   
               —
            
            
               based on the finding that there were serious difficulties in response to which the Commission should have been required to initiate the formal investigation procedure in accordance with Article 88(2) EC, those serious difficulties being demonstrated by (i) the fact that the decision was materially inaccurate, (ii) the inadequacy of the information at the Commission's disposal and (iii) the unusually short duration, as well as the circumstances, of the preliminary phase of investigation;
            
         
               —
            
            
               relating to a failure to state grounds, in so far as the Commission did not collect all the necessary information and/or did not take into consideration the information at its disposal and in so far as the Commission's reasoning in paragraph 23 of the contested decision could depart from its previously adopted position without the Commission nonetheless justifying that departure.