This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2007/247/65
Case T-329/07: Action brought on 3 September 2007 — UPS Europe and UPS Deutschland v Commission
Case T-329/07: Action brought on 3 September 2007 — UPS Europe and UPS Deutschland v Commission
Case T-329/07: Action brought on 3 September 2007 — UPS Europe and UPS Deutschland v Commission
IO C 247, 20.10.2007, p. 39–40
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
20.10.2007 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 247/39 |
Action brought on 3 September 2007 — UPS Europe and UPS Deutschland v Commission
(Case T-329/07)
(2007/C 247/65)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: UPS Europe NV/SA (Brussels, Belgium) and UPS Deutschland Inc. & Co. OHG (Neuss, Germany) (represented by: T. Ottervanger and E. Henny, lawyers)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
|
— |
To declare in accordance with Article 232 EC that the Commission has failed to act by not having defined a position with respect to the applicants' complaint lodged with the Commission on 11 May 2004; |
|
— |
to order the Commission to pay the costs incurred by the applicants in the proceedings. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicants claim that the Commission has failed to act by not having defined its position after having been invited to do so under Article 232 EC on the applicants' complaint lodged with the Commission on 11 May 2004 regarding unlawful state aid allegedly granted to Deutsche Post by Germany in form of among others state guarantees, contributions to Deutsche Post's pension fund and exemption from various statutory obligations.
In support of their application, the applicants submit that the Commission is required to conduct a diligent and impartial examination of the complaint received in particular in the light of the Commission's exclusive jurisdiction to assess the compatibility of aid measures with the common market.
The applicants further submit that Article 232 EC must be interpreted as entitling individuals or undertakings to bring an action for failure to act against an institution for failure to adopt measures which would have been of direct and individual concern to them, even though they are not the potential addressees of these measures.
Finally, the applicants contend that the measures which the Commission failed to adopt can be considered to be of direct and individual concern to the applicants as competing undertakings of Deutsche Post.