Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62010TA0045

Case T-45/10: Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2015 — GEA Group v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European market for ESBO/esters heat stabilisers — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Price fixing, market allocation and exchange of commercially sensitive information — Fines — Attribution of the infringement — Shareholding presumption — Duration and proof of the infringement — Limitation period — Duration of the administrative procedure — Reasonable time — Rights of the defence)

OJ C 302, 14.9.2015, p. 30–30 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

14.9.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 302/30


Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2015 — GEA Group v Commission

(Case T-45/10) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for ESBO/esters heat stabilisers - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Price fixing, market allocation and exchange of commercially sensitive information - Fines - Attribution of the infringement - Shareholding presumption - Duration and proof of the infringement - Limitation period - Duration of the administrative procedure - Reasonable time - Rights of the defence))

(2015/C 302/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: GEA Group AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: A. Kallmayer, I. du Mont, G. Schiffers and R. Van der Hout, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Sauer and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents, and W. Berg, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 8682 final of 11 November 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/C38.589 — Heat stabilisers), or, in the alternative, a reduction in the fine imposed.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Dismisses the action;

2.

Orders GEA Group AG to pay the costs.


(1)  OJ C 100, 17.4.2010.


Top