ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber)
10 May 2011 (*)
(Rectification of a judgment)
In Case T‑68/08,
Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), established in Zurich (Switzerland), represented initially by E. Batchelor, F. Young, Solicitors, A. Barav, D. Reymond, lawyers and F. Carlin, Barrister, and subsequently by E. Batchelor, A. Barav, D. Reymond, lawyers and F. Carlin, Barrister,
applicant,
v
European Commission, represented initially by F. Benyon, E. Montaguti and N. Yerrell, and subsequently by F. Benyon and E. Montaguti, acting as Agents, assisted by J. Flynn QC and M. Lester, Barrister,
defendant,
supported by
Kingdom of Belgium, represented by C. Pochet, acting as Agent, assisted by J. Stuyck and A. Joachimowicz, lawyers,
and by
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, represented initially by S. Behzadi-Spencer and V. Jackson, and subsequently by S. Behzadi-Spencer and L. Seeboruth, acting as Agents, assisted initially by T. de la Mare and subsequently by B. Kennelly, Barristers,
interveners,
APPLICATION for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2007/730/EC of 16 October 2007 on the compatibility with Community law of measures taken by the United Kingdom pursuant to Article 3a(1) of Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities (OJ 2007 L 295, p. 12),
THE GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber),
composed of N.J. Forwood (Rapporteur), President, L. Truchot and J. Schwarcz, Judges,
Registrar : E. Coulon,
makes the following
Order
1 On 17 February 2011 the Court (Seventh Chamber) gave judgment in Case T‑68/08.
2 In accordance with Article 84(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the parties having been given an opportunity to lodge their written observations pursuant to Article 84(2) of those rules, it is necessary to rectify the clerical mistakes found in a number of paragraphs of that judgment.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber)
hereby orders:
1. In paragraph 8 of the judgment the words ‘of a list contained’ should read ‘of a list of criteria contained’ and the words ‘the Secretary of State uses’ should read ‘the Secretary of State was to apply’.
2. In paragraph 49 of the judgment the words ‘Even though measures’ should read ‘Even if measures’.
3. In paragraph 95 of the judgment the words ‘when the Commission’ should read ‘whilst the Commission’.
4. In paragraph 103 of the judgment the words ‘The Commission therefore did not err in finding’ should read ‘The Commission therefore erred in finding’.
5. In paragraph 110 of the judgment the words ‘showing that, in its submission,’ should read ‘showing, in its submission, that’.
6. In paragraph 119 of the judgement the words ‘as part of the present plea’ should read ‘within the framework of the present plea’.
7. In paragraph 132 of the judgment the words ‘the decision not to require’ should read ‘the choice not to require’.
8. In paragraph 153 of the judgment the words ‘it is true that national measures’ should read ‘it is true that where national measures’.
9. In paragraph 167 of the judgment the words ‘the fact the criteria’ should read ‘the fact that the criteria’.
10. In paragraph 178 of the judgment the words ‘which may acquire broadcast rights’ should read ‘which may acquire exclusive broadcast rights’.
11. In paragraph 180 the words ‘the fact that, with the authorisation’ should read ‘the result that, with the authorisation’.
12. The original of this order shall be annexed to the original of the rectified judgment. A note of this order shall be made in the margin of the original of the rectified judgment.
Luxembourg, 10 May 2011.