6.8.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/12

—

(Case C-204/11 P)

(2011/C 232/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Fédération internationale de football association (FIFA) (represented by: A. Barav, and D. Reymond, avocats)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Kingdom of Belgium, Federal Republic of Germany, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

—uphold the judgment of the General Court delivered on 17 February 2011 in Case T-385/07 as regards admissibility;

—set aside the judgment of the General Court delivered on 17 February 2011 in Case T-385/07 as regards the substance, in so far as it approves the inclusion of the ‘non-prime’ matches of the FIFA World Cup™ in the Belgian list of events ‘of major importance for society’ within the meaning of the Directive;

—give final judgment pursuant to Article 61 of the Statute of the Court of Justice;

—order the Commission to pay FIFA's costs arising from the proceedings at first instance and from the present appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant contends that the General Court infringed EU law in giving reasons not featured in the Commission decision for its finding that the Commission correctly characterised the FIFA World Cup™ as ‘by nature, a single event’ for the purposes of Directive 89/552/EEC as amended by Directive 97/36/EC, in giving contradictory and inconsistent reasons, in holding that no specific grounds should be supplied by Member States for including the entire FIFA World Cup™ in their lists of major events, and in reversing the burden of proof.

The appellant argues that the General Court infringed EU law in holding that the Commission lawfully found and gave sufficient reasons for its finding that the entire FIFA World Cup™ is an event of major importance for Belgian society within the meaning of Directive 89/552/EEC as amended by Directive 97/36/EC. In particular, the General Court made an error of law and drew wrong legal conclusions from the facts in endorsing the Commission's unsupported findings that the entire FIFA World Cup™ has ‘a special general resonance in Belgium’, that it has been traditionally broadcast on free-to-air television and that it commanded large audiences.

This plea is divided into two branches:

First branch: The appellant alleges that the General Court infringed EU law in holding that the Commission lawfully found that the notified Belgian measures were compatible with EU law, although the restrictions on the right of establishment were not addressed in the contested decision. The General Court further infringed EU law by holding that the restrictions on the right of establishment were proportionate and in holding that the Commission lawfully found, and that it gave sufficient reasons for its finding, that the restrictions on the freedom to provide services were proportionate.

Second branch: The appellant contends that the General Court infringed EU law in holding that the Commission lawfully found that the notified Belgian measures were compatible with EU law, although the restrictions on FIFA's property rights were not addressed in the contested decision. The General Court further infringed EU law by holding that the restrictions on FIFA's right to property were proportionate.

*

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 L 298, p. 23

Directive 97/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1997 amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC 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 L 202, p. 60

Commission decision (2007/479/EC) of 25 June 2007 on the compatibility with Community law of measures taken by Belgium pursuant to Article 3a (l) of Council Directive 89/552/EEC 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 L 180, p. 24.

—

—