In Case T-95/96,
Gestevisin Telecinco SA, a company governed by Spanish law, established in Madrid (Spain), represented by Santiago Muoz Machado, of the Madrid Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Carlos Amo Quiones, 2 Rue Gabriel Lippmann,
Commission of the European Communities, represented initially by Grard Rozet, Legal Adviser, and Fernando Castillo de la Torre, of its Legal Service, and then by Mr Rozet and Juan Guerra Fernndez, of its Legal Service, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos Gmez de la Cruz, of its Legal Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,
composed of: V. Tiili, President, C.P. Brit, K. Lenaerts, A. Potocki and J.D. Cooke, Judges,
Registrar: H. Jung,
having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 10 March 1998,
gives the following
'Having considered your complaint in the light of Article 92 et seq. of the Treaty and following completion of a study commissioned in December 1993 on the funding of public television in other Member States, the Directorate-General for Competition, by letters dated 18 October 1995 and 14 February 1996, requested the Spanish authorities to provide a number of further details and explanations necessary for investigating this case.
declare that the Commission failed to fulfil its obligations under the Treaty by not adopting a decision on the two complaints lodged by it and by not initiating the procedure laid down in Article 93(2) of the Treaty;
alternatively, annul the Commission's decision contained in its letter of 20 February 1996;
order the defendant to pay the costs;
order the intervener to pay its own costs and the costs incurred by the applicant as a result of its intervention.
declare the claim for a declaration of failure to act inadmissible, alternatively, dismiss it as unfounded;
declare the claim for annulment inadmissible;
order the applicant to pay the costs.
On those grounds,
1. Declares that the Commission failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty by failing to adopt a decision following the two complaints lodged by the applicant on 2 March 1992 and 12 November 1993;
2. Orders the Commission to pay the applicant's costs other than those incurred as a result of the intervention by the French Republic;
3. Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs together with the costs incurred by the applicant by reason of its intervention.
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 15 September 1998.
1: Language of the case: Spanish.