Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62009TB0058

Case T-58/09: Order of the General Court of 2 September 2010 — Schemaventotto v Commission (Action for annulment — Concentrations — Abandonment of an intended concentration — Decision to close the procedure opened under Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 — Act not amenable to review — Inadmissibility)

IO C 288, 23.10.2010, p. 41–41 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

23.10.2010   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/41


Order of the General Court of 2 September 2010 — Schemaventotto v Commission

(Case T-58/09) (1)

(Action for annulment - Concentrations - Abandonment of an intended concentration - Decision to close the procedure opened under Article 21(4) of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 - Act not amenable to review - Inadmissibility)

(2010/C 288/78)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Schemaventotto SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: M. Siragusa, G. Scassellati Sforzolini, G. Rizza and M. Piergiovanni, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci and É. Gippini Fournier, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Abertis Infraestructuras, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: M. Roca Junyent and P. Callol García, lawyers)

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision or decisions allegedly contained in the Commission’s letter of 13 August 2008 concerning the proceeding opened under Article 21(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ 2004 L 24, p. 1) in relation to the concentration between the intervener and Autostrade SpA (Case COMP/M.4388 Abertis v Autostrade)

Operative part of the order

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

2.

Schemaventotto SpA shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

3.

Abertis Infraestructuras, SA shall bear its own costs..


(1)  OJ C 82, 4.4.2009.


Top