62017TJ0342_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 30 March 2022 – Deutsche Lufthansa and Others v Commission
(Case T‑342/17) (
1
)
(Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for airfreight – Decision finding an infringement of 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 – Coordination of elements of the price of air freight services (fuel surcharge, security surcharge, payment of commission on surcharges) – Exchange of information – Territorial jurisdiction of the Commission – Obligation to state reasons – Effect on trade between Member States – State coercion – Single and continuous infringement)
1.
Judicial proceedings – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements – Identification of the subject matter of the dispute – Brief statement of the pleas in law on which the application is based – Identification of pleas in law by reference to their substance and not their formal characterisation
(Art. 263 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 76(d))
(see paragraphs 64-66)
2.
Competition – Administrative procedure – Commission decision finding an infringement – Identification of the infringements penalised – Requirements arising from the principle of effective judicial protection – Clarity and precision of the operative part of the decision – Assessment – Precedence of the wording of the operative part over the grounds
(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Arts 8 and 11(2); Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47)
(see paragraphs 75-78)
3.
Competition – EU rules – Territorial scope – Competence of the Commission – Conformity with public international law – Implementation or qualified effects of abusive practices in the EEA – Alternative methods – Criterion of the immediate, substantial and foreseeable effect – Scope in the case of conduct having the object of restricting competition
(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53)
(see paragraphs 102-111, 123, 124, 130, 134, 136-139, 140-142, 150, 151-156)
4.
Action for annulment – Pleas in law – Lack of competence of the institution which adopted the contested measure – Examination by the EU judicature of its own motion – Condition – Compliance with the principle that the parties should be heard
(Art. 263 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 175, 176)
5.
Competition – Transport – Competition rules – Air transport – Council Regulations on the implementation of EU competition rules – Scope – EU-third country routes and non-EU EEA-third country routes – Included from May 2004 and May 2005 onwards respectively – Competence of the Commission – Scope – Burden of proving the infringement and its duration on the Commission – Reliance on a body of evidence – Taking into account of elements which took place before those dates – Conditions under which permissible
(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53 and Annex XIII, as well as Protocol 21, as amended by EEA Joint Committee Decision No 40/2005; Council Regulations No 1/2003, Art. 32(c), and No 411/2004, Arts 1 and 3)
(see paragraphs 208-221, 229, 235)
6.
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Prohibition – Infringements – Agreements and concerted practices constituting a single infringement – Meaning – Unlawful practices and conduct forming part of an overall plan with a single objective – Assessment – Criteria – Identical object and undertakings – Relevant evidence
(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Art. 8)
(see paragraphs 239-242, 253-261, 273-275, 285-287, 302, 303)
7.
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Adverse effect on competition – Criteria for assessment – Content and objective of a cartel and economic and legal context of its development – Distinction between infringements by object and infringements by effect – Intention of the parties to an agreement to restrict competition – Not a necessary criterion – Infringement by object – Sufficient degree of harmfulness – Criteria for assessment
(Art. 101 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 325-328, 332-335)
8.
Competition – EU rules – Substantive scope – Conduct imposed by State measures – Not included – Conditions – Existence of State coercion capable of excluding all autonomous conduct of undertakings – Burden of proof incumbent on the undertaking relying thereon – Scope
(Arts 101 and 102 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 346-350, 357, 359)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders the European Commission to bear one third of its own costs;
3.
Orders Deutsche Lufthansa AG, Lufthansa Cargo AG, Swiss International Air Lines AG to bear their own costs and to pay two thirds of those incurred by the Commission.
(
1
)	OJ C 239, 24.7.2017.