Translation of "Position d'annulation " (French → English) :

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 9 September 2010 in Case T-155/06 Tomra Systems ASA and Others v European Commission dismissing an action for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 29 March 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 82 of the EC Treaty and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/E-1/38.113 — Prokent/Tomra) imposing a fine of EUR 24 million on the appellants for abusing their dominant position by engaging in practices involving exclusivity agreements, quantity commitments and loyalty rebates in order to prevent or delay the entry of other manufacturers on the market for ...[+++] machines for the collection of used beverage containers in Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, and, in the alternative, an application for annulment or substantial reduction of the fine.

It added that while, in its observations in the case giving rise to the judgment of 23 October 2008 in People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran v Council, the Council expressly stated its intention of taking a position, as a matter of urgency, on ‘new elements’ brought to its attention, that institution nevertheless refrained from forwarding them to the PMOI, without claiming that any factual or legal obstacle prevented its doing so, even though the General Court had, by its judgment in People’s Mojahedin ...[+++]Organization of Iran v Council, annulled one of its earlier decisions, precisely on the ground that no such communication had been made before the decision was adopted.

Pursuant to Article 9 of the Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions, the legal effects of common positions adopted by the Council under Title V of the Treaty on European Union prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon are to be preserved until they are repealed, annulled or amended in implementation of the Treaties.

Similarly, RAI maintains that the Commission's position does not take into account the obligations on RAI as the public service television broadcaster, which would reduce the alleged advantages to zero.

First, the third ground of appeal must be declared inadmissible in so far as it alleges that the Court of First Instance infringed Article 73 of Regulation No 40/94 by not annulling the decision in dispute for being based on grounds on which the appellant had not had an opportunity to present its comments.

Whether travelling for business or pleasure being denied boarding of a flight or finding that the flight has been delayed or cancelled is distressing, frustrating and inconvenient for any air passenger. With this in mind, the airline industry has already begun to take positive action with the launch in May 2001 of the Airline Passenger Service Commitment.