EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62006TJ0055

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 November 2011.
RKW SE and JM Gesellschaft für industrielle Beteiligungen mbH & Co. KGaA v European Commission.
Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Plastic industrial bags sector - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Fines - Guidelines for the calculation of fines - Maximum limit of 10% of turnover - Implementation - Legality - Proportionality - Equal treatment - Single and continuous infringement - Attenuating circumstances - Exclusively passive role - Duty to state reasons - Imputability of unlawful conduct.
Joined cases T-55/06 and T-66/06.

European Court Reports 2011 II-00395*

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2011:668





Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 November 2011 – RKW and JM Gesellschaft für industrielle Beteiligungen v Commission

(Joined Cases T-55/06 and T-66/06)

Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Plastic industrial bags sector – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Fines – Guidelines for the calculation of fines – Maximum limit of 10% of turnover – Implementation – Legality – Proportionality – Equal treatment – Single and continuous infringement – Attenuating circumstances – Exclusively passive role – Duty to state reasons – Imputability of unlawful conduct

1.                     Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Discretion conferred on the Commission by Article 23(2) of Regulation No 1/2003 – Infringement of the principle that penalties must have a sound legal basis – None (Art. 81(1) EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2); Commission Notice 98/C 9/03) (see paras 19-20)

2.                     Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Principle of equal treatment – Differences between undertakings arising from application of the maximum amount – Lawfulness (Art. 81(1) EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2); Commission Notice 98/C 9/03) (see paras 21, 24)

3.                     Competition – Community rules – Infringements – Fines – Determination – Criteria – Raising of the general level of fines – Lawfulness – Conditions – Duty to state reasons – Scope (Arts 81(1) EC and 253 EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2); Commission Notice 98/C 9/03) (see paras 31-32)

4.                     Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Criteria – Gravity of the infringement – Mitigating circumstances – Passive or ‘follow-my-leader’ role of the undertaking – Criteria for assessment (Art. 81(1) EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2); Commission Notice 98/C 9/03, Section 3, first indent) (see paras 81-83, 86-87, 89)

5.                     Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Criteria – Gravity of the infringement – Mitigating circumstances – Termination of the infringement after the Commission’s intervention – Margin of discretion of the Commission (Art. 81(1) EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2); Commission Notice 98/C 9/03, Section 3) (see para. 94)

6.                     Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Non-imposition or reduction of the fine for cooperation of the undertaking concerned – Reduction for not disputing the facts – Conditions (Art. 81(1) EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2); Commission Notice 96/C 207/04, Title D, Section 2) (see paras 101-102)

7.                     Competition – Community rules – Infringements – Attribution – Parent company and subsidiaries – Economic unit – Criteria for assessment – Presumption of decisive influence exercised by the parent company over its wholly‑owned subsidiaries – Evidential obligations of the company seeking to rebut that presumption (Art. 81(1) EC) (see paras 111-116)

Re:

APPLICATION for annulment of Commission Decision C (2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] (Case COMP/F/38.354 – Industrial bags) and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants.

Operative part

The Court:

1.

Dismisses the action;

2.

Orders RKW SE and JM Gesellschaft für industrielle Beteiligungen mbH & Co. KGaA to pay the costs.

Top