# C_2018319EN.01001901.xml

| 10.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 319/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 319/19

---

Action brought on 10 July 2018 — Crédit agricole and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Commission

(Case T-419/18)

(2018/C 319/23)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Crédit agricole SA (Montrouge, France) and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank (Montrouge) (represented by J.-P. Tran Thiet, M. Powell, J. Jourdan and J.-J. Lemonnier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision in so far as it rejects the applications for confidential treatment made by the applicants; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision in so far as it rejects the applications for confidential treatment made by the applicants;

| — | order the Commission to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay all the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of their action against Commission Decision C(2018) 2743 final of 27 April 2018 concerning objections to the disclosure of information submitted by the applicants on the basis of Article 8 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 (OJ 2011, L 275, p. 29) on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (Case AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives (EIRD)), the applicants put forward two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the publication of information concerning the applicants relating to discussions between traders before the infringement period breaches the presumption of innocence. In that regard, the Commission is not entitled to publish a decision containing allusions to infringing conduct that the applicants cannot challenge. The contested decision thus erred in law in rejecting the requests for confidential treatment of the applicants concerning that information. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the publication of information concerning the applicants relating to discussions between traders before the infringement period breaches the presumption of innocence. In that regard, the Commission is not entitled to publish a decision containing allusions to infringing conduct that the applicants cannot challenge. The contested decision thus erred in law in rejecting the requests for confidential treatment of the applicants concerning that information.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the publication, before a ruling on the merits by the Court in Case T-113/17, Crédit agricole et Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Commission, of information alluding to infringing conduct by the applicants, which they dispute before the Court, constitutes an infringement of the presumption of innocence. The contested decision therefore erred in law in rejecting the applications for confidential treatment made by the applicants concerning that information. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the publication, before a ruling on the merits by the Court in Case T-113/17, Crédit agricole et Crédit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Commission, of information alluding to infringing conduct by the applicants, which they dispute before the Court, constitutes an infringement of the presumption of innocence. The contested decision therefore erred in law in rejecting the applications for confidential treatment made by the applicants concerning that information.

---