# C_2022303EN.01003201.xml

| 8.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/32

---

Appeal brought on 17 June 2022 by SAS Cargo Group A/S, Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden, SAS AB against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 30 March 2022 in Case T-324/17, SAS Cargo Group e.a. v Commission

(Case C-403/22 P)

(2022/C 303/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: SAS Cargo Group A/S, Scandinavian Airlines System Denmark-Norway-Sweden, SAS AB (represented by: B. Creve and M. Kofmann, advokater, and J. Killick and G. Forwood, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellants claim that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment under appeal insofar as it dismissed the appellants’ action for annulment; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment under appeal insofar as it dismissed the appellants’ action for annulment;

| — | annul in whole or in part the Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) insofar as it relates to the appellants; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul in whole or in part the Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) insofar as it relates to the appellants;

| — | cancel or substantially reduce the fine imposed; |
| --- | --- |

—

cancel or substantially reduce the fine imposed;

| — | in the alternative, refer the matter back to the General Court for determination in accordance with the judgment of the Court of Justice; and |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, refer the matter back to the General Court for determination in accordance with the judgment of the Court of Justice; and

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the appeal and the proceedings before the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the appeal and the proceedings before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the appellants rely on five grounds of appeal.

First ground of appeal, alleging errors of law regarding infringement of the rights of defence and right of access to file by failing to give access to inculpatory and exculpatory evidence.

Second ground of appeal, alleging errors of law regarding the right to be heard with regard to the qualified effects test and inbound routes.

Third ground of appeal, alleging errors of law regarding the application of the qualified effects test.

Fourth ground of appeal, alleging errors of law regarding the single and continuous infringement.

Fifth ground of appeal, alleging errors of law regarding the General Court’s exercise of its unlimited jurisdiction to determine the fine.

---