This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62006TN0347
Case T-347/06: Action brought on 4 December 2006 — Nynäs Petroleum and Nynas Belgium v Commission
Case T-347/06: Action brought on 4 December 2006 — Nynäs Petroleum and Nynas Belgium v Commission
Case T-347/06: Action brought on 4 December 2006 — Nynäs Petroleum and Nynas Belgium v Commission
IO C 20, 27.1.2007, p. 19–19
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
IO C 20, 27.1.2007, p. 18–18
(BG, RO)
|
27.1.2007 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 20/19 |
Action brought on 4 December 2006 — Nynäs Petroleum and Nynas Belgium v Commission
(Case T-347/06)
(2007/C 20/27)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: AB Nynäs Petroleum (Stockholm, Sweden) and Nynas Belgium AB (Zaventem, Belgium) (represented by: A. Howard, Barrister, and M. Dean, Solicitor)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
|
— |
Annul Article 1 of the decision in so far as it imputes joint and several liability to AB Nynas; |
|
— |
annul Article 2 of the decision in so far as it imposes a fine of EUR 13.5 million on Nynas, or in the alternative, reduce that fine as appropriate; and |
|
— |
order the Commission to pay the costs. |
Pleas in law and main arguments
The applicants seek partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 4090 final of 13 September 2006 in Case COMP/F/38.456 — Bitumen — NL, by which the Commission found that the applicants, together with other undertakings, had infringed Article 81 EC by regularly and collectively fixing, for sales and purchases of road pavement bitumen in the Netherlands, the gross price, a uniform rebate on the gross price for participating road builders and a smaller maximum rebate on the gross price for other road builders.
In support of their application, the applicants submit, first of all, that the Commission committed errors of law and assessment in holding Nynäs Petroleum jointly and severally liable for the infringement committed by Nynas Belgium as Nynas Belgium operated as an autonomous legal entity that determined its commercial policy independently from Nynäs Petroleum. According to the applicants, the Commission has not demonstrated that Nynäs Petroleum had the power to direct the operations of Nynas Belgium to the point of depriving it of any real independence in determining its own course of action on the market.
Secondly, the applicants allege that the Commission disregarded the provisions of the Leniency Notice (1) contrary to the principles of legitimate expectations and equal treatment, when it dismissed the value of the information voluntarily provided by the applicants under Part B of the Leniency Notice and refused to grant the applicants a reduction for cooperation. The applicants claim that the Commission among others committed the following errors of law and assessment:
|
— |
the Commission wrongly concluded that the information provided by the applicants did not of its nature strengthen the Commission's ability to prove the infringement, since other participants in the infringement had already admitted the infringement and other replies to the request for information had already confirmed the existence of a system of meetings; |
|
— |
the Commission wrongly concluded that the information provided by the applicants did not constitute significant added value. |
(1) Commission notice on immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases (OJ 2002 C 45, p. 3)