EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62013CA0090

Case C-90/13 P: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 May 2014  — 1. garantovaná a.s. v European Commission (Appeal — Competition — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Calculation of the amount of the fine — Total turnover in the preceding business year)

IO C 212, 7.7.2014, p. 8–9 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

7.7.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/8


Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 15 May 2014 — 1. garantovaná a.s. v European Commission

(Case C-90/13 P) (1)

((Appeal - Competition - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Calculation of the amount of the fine - Total turnover in the preceding business year))

2014/C 212/08

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: 1. garantovaná a.s. (represented by: K. Lasok QC, J. Holmes and B. Hartnett, Barristers, O. Geiss, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: T. Vecchi and N. Khan, acting as Agents)

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 12 December 2012 in Case T-392/09 1. garantovaná v Commission by which the General Court dismissed an action for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 5791 final of 22 July 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.396 — Calcium carbide and magnesium based reagents for the steel industry), concerning a cartel on the markets for calcium carbide powder, calcium carbide granulates and magnesium granulates in a substantial part of the EEA, involving price fixing, market sharing and exchange of information, and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the appellant — Calculation of the fine — Upper limit of 10 % of turnover — Relevant turnover

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

2.

Orders 1. garantovaná a.s. to pay the costs.


(1)  OJ C 114, 20.4.2013.


Top