Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62014TA0439

    Case T-439/14: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — LS Cable & System v Commission (Competition — Agreement, decisions and concerted practices — European market for power cables — Single and continuous infringement — Sufficient proof — Contributing to the single objective of the infringement — Knowledge of key elements of the infringement — Calculation of the fine — Basic amount — Paragraph 18 of the Guidelines — Gravity of the infringement — Proportionality — Mitigating circumstances — Unlimited jurisdiction)

    IO C 328, 17.9.2018, p. 33–34 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    17.9.2018   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 328/33


    Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — LS Cable & System v Commission

    (Case T-439/14) (1)

    ((Competition - Agreement, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Single and continuous infringement - Sufficient proof - Contributing to the single objective of the infringement - Knowledge of key elements of the infringement - Calculation of the fine - Basic amount - Paragraph 18 of the Guidelines - Gravity of the infringement - Proportionality - Mitigating circumstances - Unlimited jurisdiction))

    (2018/C 328/44)

    Language of the case: English

    Parties

    Applicant: LS Cable & System Ltd (Anyang-si, South Korea) (represented by: S. Kinsella and S. Spinks, Solicitors)

    Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: C. Giolito, A. Biolan and N. Khan, and subsequently by N. Khan and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents, and by B. Rayment, Barrister)

    Re:

    Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicant and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Court:

    1.

    Dismisses the action;

    2.

    Orders LS Cable & System Ltd to pay the costs.


    (1)  OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.


    Top