3.12.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 355/11

Appeal brought on 27 September 2011 by The Dow Chemical Company, Dow Deutschland Inc., Dow Deutschland Anlagengesellschaft mbH, Dow Europe GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 13 July 2011 in Case T-42/07: The Dow Chemical Company and others v European Commission

(Case C-499/11 P)

2011/C 355/18

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: The Dow Chemical Company, Dow Deutschland Inc., Dow Deutschland Anlagengesellschaft mbH, Dow Europe GmbH (represented by: D. Schroeder, Rechtsanwalt, T. Kuhn, Rechtsanwalt, T. Graf, Advocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

—

The Dow Chemical Company respectfully requests the Court of Justice to set aside the General Court's judgment in Case T-42/07 in so far as it dismisses its request to annul the Commission's decision of 29 November 2006 in Case COMP/F/38.638 insofar as it relates to it;

—

The Dow Chemical Company respectfully requests the Court of Justice to annul the Commission's decision of 29 November 2006 in Case COMP/F/38.638 insofar as it relates to it;

—

All Appellants respectfully request the Court of Justice to set aside the General Court's judgment in Case T-42/07 in so far as it dismisses their request to substantially reduce their fines;

—

All Appellants respectfully request the Court of Justice to substantially reduce their fines;

—

All Appellants respectfully request the Court of Justice

—

to order the Commission to pay the Appellants’ legal and other costs and expenses in relation to this matter; and

—

take any other measures that this Court considers appropriate.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appeal contains four pleas. According to the first plea, the General Court erred in law by assuming that the Commission does not have to exercise its discretion properly and by not exercising the full scope of judicial review with regard to the exercise of the Commission's discretion in holding The Dow Chemical Company liable. According to the second plea, the General Court erred in law with respect to the differential treatment applied to the starting amounts of the fine. According to the third plea, the General Court erred in law by confirming that the Commission was entitled to take The Dow Chemical Company's turnover into account. According to the fourth plea, the General Court erred in law by confirming that the Commission's application of the deterrence multiplier is not discriminatory.