Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62011CB0421

    Case C-421/11 P: Order of the Court of 7 February 2012 — Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA v European Commission (Appeal — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Competition — Cartel — Market for methacrylates — Concept of ‘undertaking’ — Presumption of decisive influence — Obligation to state reasons — Principle of sound administration — Extension of the authority of a final decision — Deterrent multiplying factor — Indivisible nature of the fine — Unlimited jurisdiction)

    OJ C 133, 5.5.2012, p. 12–12 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    5.5.2012   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 133/12


    Order of the Court of 7 February 2012 — Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA v European Commission

    (Case C-421/11 P) (1)

    (Appeal - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Competition - Cartel - Market for methacrylates - Concept of ‘undertaking’ - Presumption of decisive influence - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of sound administration - Extension of the authority of a final decision - Deterrent multiplying factor - Indivisible nature of the fine - Unlimited jurisdiction)

    2012/C 133/21

    Language of the case: French

    Parties

    Appellants: Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA (represented by: E. Morgan de Rivery and A. Noël-Baron, lawyers)

    Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka and B. Gencarelli, Agents)

    Re:

    Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 June 2011 in Case T-206/06 Total and Elf Aquitaine v Commission, in which the General Court dismissed the action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 2098 final of 31 May 2006 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.645 — Methacrylates) — Competition — Cartel — Infringement of the principles of conferral of powers and proportionality — Manifestly erroneous interpretation — Infringement of the rights of the defence, the principle of fairness and the principle of equality of arms — Obligation to state reasons — Infringement of the principle of sound administration

    Operative part of the order

    1.

    The appeal is dismissed.

    2.

    Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA shall pay the costs.


    (1)  OJ C 340, 19.11.2011.


    Top