# C_2015146EN.01002301.xml

| 4.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 146/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 146/23

---

Appeal brought on 20 February 2015 by Ferriere Nord SpA against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 9 December 2014 in Case T-90/10 Ferriere Nord v Commission

(Case C-88/15 P)

(2015/C 146/30)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Ferriere Nord SpA (represented by: W. Viscardini and G. Donà, avvocati)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | primarily, set aside the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 9 December 2014 in Case T-90/10 to the extent that it dismissed Ferriere Nord’s main head of claim seeking the annulment in its entirety of Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009, as amended and supplemented by Commission Decision C(2009) 9912 final of 8 December 2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

primarily, set aside the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 9 December 2014 in Case T-90/10 to the extent that it dismissed Ferriere Nord’s main head of claim seeking the annulment in its entirety of Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009, as amended and supplemented by Commission Decision C(2009) 9912 final of 8 December 2009;

| — | consequently, annul the Commission Decisions mentioned above; |
| --- | --- |

—

consequently, annul the Commission Decisions mentioned above;

| — | in the alternative, set aside the judgment under appeal to the extent that it dismissed Ferriere Nord’s alternative head of claim seeking the annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009, as amended and supplemented by Commission Decision C(2009) 9912 final of 8 December 2009 and, as a result, reduce the fine imposed; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, set aside the judgment under appeal to the extent that it dismissed Ferriere Nord’s alternative head of claim seeking the annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009, as amended and supplemented by Commission Decision C(2009) 9912 final of 8 December 2009 and, as a result, reduce the fine imposed;

| — | consequently, annul in part the Commission Decisions mentioned above and, as a result, order a further reduction (in addition to the reduction already granted by the General Court) of the fine imposed; |
| --- | --- |

—

consequently, annul in part the Commission Decisions mentioned above and, as a result, order a further reduction (in addition to the reduction already granted by the General Court) of the fine imposed;

| — | in any event, order the European Commission to pay the costs at first instance and on appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

in any event, order the European Commission to pay the costs at first instance and on appeal.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

| I — | Manifest distortion, as can be seen from the acts in question, of the facts and the evidence as regards the Commission’s lack of competence to impose penalties on Ferriere Nord — Unlawful failure to establish the clear contradictions in the statement of reasons for the Commission’s decision and failure to state reasons — Infringement of the rules governing the burden of proof. |
| --- | --- |

I —

Manifest distortion, as can be seen from the acts in question, of the facts and the evidence as regards the Commission’s lack of competence to impose penalties on Ferriere Nord — Unlawful failure to establish the clear contradictions in the statement of reasons for the Commission’s decision and failure to state reasons — Infringement of the rules governing the burden of proof.

| II — | Infringement of Article 27 of Regulation No 1/2003 (1) owing to a failure to communicate a new ‘Statement of Objections’ beforehand — Infringement of the principle of legitimate expectations — Manifest distortion, as can be seen from the acts in question, of the facts and the evidence — Infringement of the rights of the defence — Failure to state reasons — Infringement of the right to a hearing before the Hearing Officer. |
| --- | --- |

II —

Infringement of Article 27 of Regulation No 1/2003 (1) owing to a failure to communicate a new ‘Statement of Objections’ beforehand — Infringement of the principle of legitimate expectations — Manifest distortion, as can be seen from the acts in question, of the facts and the evidence — Infringement of the rights of the defence — Failure to state reasons — Infringement of the right to a hearing before the Hearing Officer.

1

| III — | Infringement of the Commission’s internal rules of procedure (and, in turn, of primary and secondary EU law on multilingualism) owing to the authentic language version of the Hearing Officer’s Final Report postdating the decision adopted by the College of Commissioners on 30 September 2009. |
| --- | --- |

III —

Infringement of the Commission’s internal rules of procedure (and, in turn, of primary and secondary EU law on multilingualism) owing to the authentic language version of the Hearing Officer’s Final Report postdating the decision adopted by the College of Commissioners on 30 September 2009.

| IV — | Duration of Ferriere Nord’s participation in the cartel — Errors of law in the assessment of the facts: distortion of the evidence — Infringement of the general principles concerning the burden of proof and in dubio pro reo — Contradictory statement of reasons. |
| --- | --- |

IV —

Duration of Ferriere Nord’s participation in the cartel — Errors of law in the assessment of the facts: distortion of the evidence — Infringement of the general principles concerning the burden of proof and in dubio pro reo — Contradictory statement of reasons.

in dubio pro reo

| V — | Infringement of the principle of proportionality in determining the basic amount of the fine applied to Ferriere Nord in view of the seriousness and duration of the cartel — Infringement of the principle of equal treatment — Failure to state reasons. |
| --- | --- |

V —

Infringement of the principle of proportionality in determining the basic amount of the fine applied to Ferriere Nord in view of the seriousness and duration of the cartel — Infringement of the principle of equal treatment — Failure to state reasons.

| VI — | Manifest error (or clear inaccuracy) in calculating the reduction of the fine imposed on Ferriere Nord — Misuse of powers of unlimited jurisdiction — Failures to state reasons. |
| --- | --- |

VI —

Manifest error (or clear inaccuracy) in calculating the reduction of the fine imposed on Ferriere Nord — Misuse of powers of unlimited jurisdiction — Failures to state reasons.

| VII — | Increase in the basic amount of the fine for repeated infringement unlawful due to infringement of the rights of the defence. |
| --- | --- |

VII —

Increase in the basic amount of the fine for repeated infringement unlawful due to infringement of the rights of the defence.

| VIII — | Increase in the basic amount of the fine for repeated infringement unlawful by reason of the time spent. |
| --- | --- |

VIII —

Increase in the basic amount of the fine for repeated infringement unlawful by reason of the time spent.

| IX — | Increase in the basic amount of the fine for repeated infringement unlawful due to infringement of the principle of proportionality. |
| --- | --- |

IX —

Increase in the basic amount of the fine for repeated infringement unlawful due to infringement of the principle of proportionality.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1).

1

---