Language of document :

Notice for the OJ

 

     ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

    4 June 2003

in Case T-224/99: The European Council of Transport Users ASBL (and Others( v Commission of the European Communities(1)

(Actions for annulment ( Action become devoid of purpose ( No need to adjudicate)

    (Language of the case: English)

In Case T-224/99, The European Council of Transport Users ASBL, established in Brussels, The Freight Transport Association, established in Tunbridge Wells (United Kingdom), Association des Utilisateurs de Transport de Fret (AUTF), established in Paris, and Industrieförbundet, established in Stockholm, represented by M. Clough QC, with an address for service in Luxembourg, v Commission of the European Communities (Agent: R. Lyal), supported by Atlantic Container Line AB, established in Göteborg (Sweden), Hapag-Lloyd AG, established in Hamburg (Germany), Mediterranean Shipping Company SA, established in Geneva (Switzerland), A.P. Møller-Mærsk Line, established in Copenhagen, Nippon Yusen Kaisha, established in Tokyo (Japan), Orient Overseas Container Line (UK) Ltd, established in London and P & O Nedlloyd Container Line Ltd, established in London, represented by J. Pheasant and M. Levitt, Solicitors, with an address for service in Luxembourg: Application for annulment of the decision of the Commission, communicated to the applicants by letter of 6 August 1999, not to raise serious doubts, within the meaning of Article 12 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 of 19 July 1968 applying rules of competition to transport by rail, road and inland waterway (OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (I), p. 302), concerning the revised version of the Trans-Atlantic Conference Agreement (TACA), the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber), composed of: K. Lenaerts, President, J. Azizi and M. Jaeger, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, has made an order on 4 June 2003, the operative part of which is as follows:

1.    There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

2.    The parties shall bear their own costs.

____________

1 - OJ C 6 of 8.1.2000