You are on page 1of 2

C 234/34 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25.7.

98

The applicant seeks relief from the Court of First Instance Action brought on 29 May 1998 by FeÂdeÂration
on the ground that in rejecting her complaint the Internationale de l'Automobile against the Commission of
Commission failed to properly investigate the question the European Communities
whether her rights under Article 85 could be adequately (Case T-85/98)
safeguarded by the national courts of the United Kingdom.
(98/C 234/66)
(1) Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1984/83 of 22 June 1983
on the application of Article 85(3) of the EC Treaty to
categories of exclusive purchasing agreements (OJ L 173 of (Language of the case: English)
30.6.1983, p. 5).
(2) OJ C 206 of 30.7.1993, p. 2.
An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First
Instance of the European Communities on 29 May 1998
by FeÂdeÂration Internationale de l'Automobile, represented
by Lord Lester of Herne Hill QC, Mark Hoskins, Craig
Pouncey and Veronica Roberts, with an address for service
Action brought on 27 May 1998 by Frans Jacobs against in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Georges Baden, 7
the Commission of the European Communities Place du TheÂaÃtre.
(Case T-82/98)
(98/C 234/65) The applicant claims that the Court should:

(Language of the case: French)
Ð declare the Commission decision adopted on or
around 22 December 1997 to provide to members of
An action against the Commission of the European the press copies of the warning letters dated
Communities was brought before the Court of First 19 December 1997 was unlawful and is therefore
Instance of the European Communities on 27 May 1998 void; and
by Frans Jacobs, residing at Walshoutem (Belgium),
represented by Jean-NoeÈl Louis, VeÂronique Leclercq,
Ariane Tornel and FrancËoise Parmentier, of the Brussels Ð make an order for nominal damages in the sum of one
Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the hundred ECUs for non-pecuniary harm caused to the
offices of Fiduciaire Myson SaÁrl, 30 Rue de Cessange. applicant's reputation;

The applicant claims that the Court should: Ð order that the Commission must make good the
pecuniary loss suffered by the applicant as a result of
Ð annul the Commission's decision not to promote the the Commission's unlawful acts, namely, the leaking
applicant to grade B 4 in the 1997 promotions of the warning letters to the press and the statements
procedure; made to the press by Mr Van Miert;

Ð order the defendant to pay the costs. Ð order that the Commission should pay interest at the
annual rate of 8 % as from the date of judgment in
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support: these proceedings;

In support of his claim, the applicant maintains, first, that Ð order the Commission to pay the costs.
the contested decision is vitiated by the complete absence
of any statement of reasons, contrary to Article 25 of the
Staff Regulations of officials. Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:

He further states that, although he has been eligible for The applicant in the present case (the FIA) is an
promotion since 1 May 1997, no staff report or any other association declared in conformity with the French law of
report concerning his conduct, efficiency and ability has 1 July 1901 and enjoying consultative status at the
been drawn up as required by Article 43 of the Staff Council of Europe and at the United Nations. It is an
Regulations. The applicant considers that, in the absence international federation of 143 national automobile clubs,
of such a report, the defendant was unable to make any automobile associations, touring clubs and national
lawful assessment, on the same basis, of the comparative federations for motoring and motor sport, representing
merits of the applicant and of those of his colleagues who 113 countries and over 100 million motorists. Through its
were eligible for promotion to grade B 4, and that the Sports Division and its affiliated National Sporting
contested decision therefore disregards Article 45 of the Authorities, the FIA lays down rules accepted throughout
Staff Regulations and the principles of equal treatment the world as governing all categories of international
and non-discrimination. motor sport for vehicles with four or more wheels. These
rules are contained in the International Sporting Code. In
addition, the FIA has an economic interest in certain
25.7.98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 234/35

major motor sport championships held under its name, Action brought on 5 June 1998 by the International
including the Formula One Championship and the FIA Potash Company (IPC) against the Council of the
world Rally Championship. European Union
(Case T-87/98)
On 22 July 1994, the FIA notified its Statutes and (98/C 234/67)
International Sporting Code to the Commission for
negative clearance or exemption under Article 85 of the
(Language of the case: English)
Treaty. On 5 September 1997, the applicant and Formula
One Administration Limited (FOA) notified for the same
purpose certain agreements concerning the FIA Formula An action against the Council of the European Union was
One World Championship. Another agreement between brought before the Court of First Instance of the European
FIA and International Sportsworld Communications Communities on 5 June 1998 by the International Potash
Limited (ISC) was also notified, relating to the Company (IPC), represented by Jean-FrancËois Bellis and
commercialisation of all sound recordings and moving Richard Luff, with an address for service in Luxembourg
picture images pertaining to certain FIA Championships, at the Chambers of A. F. Brausch, 8 Rue Zithe.
other than the Formula One Championship. After having
received these notifications, the Director-General of
The applicant claims that the Court should:
competition sent to the applicant a letter and annex
containing a preliminary statement of the objections to the
FIA's rules and to the agreement governing the Formula Ð annul Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 449/
One Championship. On the same date similar letters were 98 of 23 February 1998 amending Regulation (EEC)
sent by the Director-General to FOA and ISC. The events No 3068/92 in respect of definitive anti-dumping
with which this application is concerned involve an illegal duties on imports of potassium chloride originating in
course of conduct by the Commission after the sending of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine (OJ L 58 of 27.2.1998,
these three letters. p. 15) in so far as it imposes a specific duty on
potassium chloride exported by the applicant; and

According to the applicants, the illegal course of conduct
of which complaint is made concerns: Ð order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Ð the making of a series of highly prejudicial public
statements, directly attributed to the Commissioner for
competition, and widely reported in the press, The applicant is a Russian company which exports
expressing the Commissioner's view that the FIA is potassium chloride produced in Russia and Belarus by the
guilty of the gravest infringements of EC competition following production companies which are its
rules, even though the FIA had not been given the shareholders: Production Amalgamation Belaruski', PLC
opportunity to be heard and the Commission had not Silinit' and PLC Uralaki'.
made a decision on the merits;
The present application is directed against the
Ð the disclosure to the press, in breach of the obligations regulation (1) imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on
of professional secrecy and confidentiality, by a imports of potassium chloride originating in Belarus,
member of the Commission's staff of (inter alia) Russia and Ukraine.
the abovementioned letter to the FIA from the
Director-General of competition, describing alleged By imposing an anti-dumping equal to a fixed amount in
infringements of the EC competition rules, together ECU per tonne or to the difference between a minimum
with an annex to the letter, giving guidance on price and the net, free-at-Community-frontier price per
changes considered necessary on the FIA's part (and tonne, whichever is the higher, the Community institutions
the equivalent letters sent to FOA and ISC in so far as have infringed Article 9(4) of Council Regulation (EC)
they relate to the FIA's activities); and No 384/96 (2) which provides that the amount of the anti-
dumping duty is not to exceed the margin of dumping
established but should be less than the margin if such
Ð the continuing failure by the Commission and its lesser duty would be adequate to remove the injury to the
servants to take any effective action to rectify the Community industry.
situation or mitigate the highly damaging and
prejudicial effects of these acts upon the FIA.
By adopting a specific duty in addition to the variable
duty, the Community institutions have also infringed
The applicant submits that this way of acting by the Article 3b of the Treaty establishing the European
Commission is to be considered as an infringement of Community and the principle of proportionality since the
Articles 214 of the EC Treaty and 20(1) and (2) of measures go beyond what is necessary to obtain the
Regulation (EEC) 17/62, as well as of the principle of objective pursued, namely the elimination of the dumping.
good administration.
Finally, the Council has infringed Article 190 of the Treaty
establishing the European Community by failing to