This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015TN0522
Case T-522/15: Action brought on 10 September 2015 — CCPL and Others v Commission
Case T-522/15: Action brought on 10 September 2015 — CCPL and Others v Commission
Case T-522/15: Action brought on 10 September 2015 — CCPL and Others v Commission
IO C 354, 26.10.2015, p. 52–53
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
26.10.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 354/52 |
Action brought on 10 September 2015 — CCPL and Others v Commission
(Case T-522/15)
(2015/C 354/63)
Language of the case: Italian
Parties
Applicants: CCPL — Consorzio Cooperative di Produzione e Lavoro SC (Reggio Emilia, Italy), Coopbox group SpA (Reggio Emilia, Italy), Poliemme Srl (Reggio Emilia, Italy), Coopbox Hispania, SL (Lorca, Spain), Coopbox Eastern s.r.o. (Nové Mesto nad Váhom, Slovakia) (represented by: S. Bariatti and E. Cucchiara, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
— |
annul the fine imposed on the applicants; or |
— |
in the alternative, reduce the amount of that fine; and, in any event |
— |
order the Commission to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The present action is brought against Commission Decision No C(2015) 4336 final of 24 June 2015 in Case AT.39563 — Retail food packaging, concerning the infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
In support of that action, the applicants rely on five pleas in law.
1. |
First plea in law, alleging misuse of powers on the grounds of failure to investigate adequately and to state reasons concerning the effects of the infringement.
|
2. |
Second plea in law, alleging infringement of the principles of proportionality and adequacy in determining the basic amount of the penalty.
|
3. |
Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 23(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.
|
4. |
Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the principles of proportionality and equal treatment in determining the size of the penalty.
|
5. |
Fifth plea in law, alleging infringment by the European Commission of the obligation to state reasons under Article 296 TFEU, on the ground that it took into account only partially the evidence concerning inability to pay adduced by the CCPL group.
|