Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 11 April 2003 by Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd. and Akcros Chemicals Ltd. against the Commission of the European Communities

    (Case T-125/03)

    Language of the case: English

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 11 April 2003 by Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd., Hersham, United Kingdom, and Akcros Chemicals Ltd., Hersham, United Kingdom, represented by Mr C. Swaak, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1to review under Article 230 the legality of the Decision in as far as it has been interpreted by the Commission as legitimating and/or constituting the basis of the Commission's action (which is not severable from the Decision), of seizing and/or reviewing and/or reading documents covered by legal professional privilege;

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1to annul under Article 231 the Decision in as far as it has been interpreted by the Commission as legitimating and/or constituting the basis of the Commission's action (which is not severable from the Decision), of seizing and/or reviewing and/or reading documents covered by legal professional privilege;

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1to require that the Commission, to comply with the judgement annulling the Decision, return documents covered by legal professional privilege and not to use their contents in any way;

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1to order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs in the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

Pursuant to Commission Decision C(2003)559/4 of 10 February 2003, the Commission conducted an on the spot investigation on the premises of the applicants in Eccles, Manchester, United Kingdom. In the course of the investigation, the Commission reviewed, copied and seized several documents.

Some of these documents became the object of a disagreement between the applicants and the Commission. According to the applicants, the seizure of those documents violated the general principle of legal professional privilege.

In support of their application, the applicants submit that the Commission has committed an infringement of the Treaty, an infringement of general principles of Community Law and has violated Regulation 17/62 as interpreted by the European Courts.

More specifically, the applicants claim that the Commission has violated the principle of legal professional privilege by violating the procedures relating to the application of the principle as set out by the European Courts. Furthermore, the applicant submits that the Commission violated the principle of legal professional privilege by its unjustified and immediate denial of its application during the on the spot investigation and the seizure of some of the documents. Finally, the applicants submit that the Commission violated the applicants' fundamental rights, such as the right to privacy.

____________