62019CJ0698_SUM
Case C‑698/19 P
Sony Optiarc IncandSony Optiarc America Inc
v
European Commission
Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 June 2022
(Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Optical disk drives – Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992 – Single and continuous infringement – Definition – Collusive agreements relating to procurement events concerning optical disk drives for notebook and desktop computers organised by two computer manufacturers)
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Prohibition – Infringements – Agreements and concerted practices constituting a single infringement – Attribution of liability for the entire infringement to a single undertaking – Conditions – Unlawful practices and conduct forming part of an overall plan
(Art. 101(1) TFEU)
(see paragraphs 59-61)
Competition – Administrative procedure – Statement of objections – Necessary content
(Art. 101 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 27(1))
(see paragraphs 64-76)
Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Decision to apply competition rules
(Arts 101(1) and 296 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 79-85)
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Prohibition – Infringements – Commission decision finding an infringement and imposing a fine – Judicial review – Unlimited jurisdiction – Review of legality – Scope and limits
(Arts 101, 261 and 263 TFEU;101 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 31)
(see paragraph 92)
Competition – Administrative procedure – Commission decision finding an infringement – Burden of proving the infringement and its duration on the Commission – Extent of the burden of proof – Single and continuous infringement – Lack of evidence relating to certain specific periods of the overall period considered – Irrelevant
(Art. 101 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 106-117)
Appeal – Jurisdiction of the Court – Whether it may review, on grounds of fairness, the assessment by the General Court in regard to the amount of the fines imposed on undertakings which have infringed the competition rules of the Treaty – Precluded – Challenge to that assessment on grounds alleging breach of the principle of proportionality – Whether permissible – No infringement of the principle of proportionality
(Arts 256 and 261 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 156, 157)
Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Discretion of the Commission – Judicial review – Unlimited jurisdiction of the EU judicature – Scope – Determination of the amount of the fine imposed – Criteria for assessment – Gravity and duration of the infringement – Respect for the principles of stating reasons, proportionality, that penalties must be specific to the offender and of equal treatment
(Arts 101(1) and 261 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Arts 23(3) and 31; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 61, first para.)
(see paragraphs 171-175)
See the text of the decision.