62022TJ0589_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 2 October 2024 – Silgan Holdings and Others v Commission
(Case T‑589/22) (
1
)
(Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Metal packaging market – Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU – Cooperation between the Commission and the national competition authorities – Initiation of an investigation procedure by the Commission at the request of a national competition authority – Period for re-allocation – Obligation to state reasons – Legitimate expectations – Principle of subsidiarity – Rights of the defence – Proportionality – Principle of good administration – Counterclaim for re-evaluation of the amount of the fine following a settlement procedure)
1.
Competition – Division of powers between the Commission and national competition authorities – Initiation of a proceeding by the Commission against an agreement, decision or concerted practice – Relieving the national competition authority of its competence to apply EU competition rules – Misuse of powers – No such misuse – Infringement of the principle of subsidiarity – No such infringement
(Art. 5(3) TEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, recitals 1 and 34 and Art. 11(6))
(see paragraphs 21-23, 35-40, 46, 47, 59, 60)
2.
Competition – Division of powers between the Commission and national competition authorities – Commission Notice on Cooperation within the Network of Competition Authorities – Right of undertakings to have their cases dealt with by a particular competition authority – No such right
(Arts 101 and 102 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, recital 18 and Art. 13(1); Commission Notice 2004/C 101/03, points 4 and 31)
(see paragraphs 24, 53)
3.
Competition – Division of powers between the Commission and national competition authorities – Commission Notice on Cooperation within the Network of Competition Authorities – Reallocation of a case between competition authorities after the initial allocation period of two months provided for in that communication – Infringement of the principles of proportionality and of protection of legitimate expectations – No such infringement
(Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 11(6); Commission Notice 2004/C 101/03, points 14, 18 and 19)
(see paragraphs 71-74, 85-89, 103, 104)
4.
Competition – Administrative procedure – Obligations of the Commission – Duty to act within a reasonable time – Criteria for assessment – Infringement – Consequences – Annulment of the decision finding an infringement of the competition rules – Condition – Infringement of the rights of the defence
(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41(1))
(see paragraphs 91-102)
5.
Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Discretion of the Commission – Judicial review – Unlimited jurisdiction of the EU judicature – Counterclaim seeking an increase in the amount of the fine – Included
(Arts 101(1) and 261 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 31)
(see paragraphs 110-112, 133)
6.
Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Settlement procedure – Reduction of the fine in return for the cooperation of the undertaking concerned – Counterclaim by the Commission seeking an increase in the amount of the fine – Withdrawal of the reduction granted to undertakings – Acknowledgement by the parties to the settlement procedure of the Commission's competence to deal with the case – No such acknowledgement
(Art. 101 TFEU; Commission Notice 2008/C 167/01, point 16)
(see paragraphs 118, 137-139, 145, 146)
7.
Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Settlement procedure – Reduction of the fine in return for the cooperation of the undertaking concerned – Counterclaim by the Commission seeking an increase in the amount of the fine – Withdrawal of the reduction granted to undertakings – Conditions – Facts and circumstances not known to the Commission when it adopted the decision and which arose during the proceedings
(Art. 101 TFEU; Commission Notice 2008/C 167/01, point 20)
(see paragraphs 121, 122)
8.
Judicial proceedings – Measures of inquiry – Request for production of documents – Need to justify such a measure – Request for production of certain evidence held by the other main party – Justification which is general in nature – Inadmissibility
(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 92(3))
(see paragraphs 125-135)
9.
Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Settlement procedure – Reduction of the fine in return for the cooperation of the undertaking concerned – Action for annulment challenging the decision imposing the fine – Action brought by the undertaking in question based on alleged procedural irregularities – Counterclaim by the Commission seeking an increase in the amount of the fine – The action has no effect on the procedural gains derived by the Commission from the settlement procedure
(Art. 101 TFEU; Commission Notice 2008/C 167/01, point 20)
(see paragraphs 148-150)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Dismisses the European Commission’s counterclaim;
3.
Orders Silgan Holdings, Inc., Silgan Holdings Austria GmbH, Silgan International Holdings BV, Silgan Metal Packaging Distribution GmbH and Silgan White Cap Manufacturing GmbH to bear their own costs and to pay 90% of the costs incurred by the Commission;
4.
Orders the Commission to bear 10 % of its own costs;
5.
Orders the Federal Republic of Germany and the Council of the European Union each to bear their own costs.
(
1
)	OJ C 424, 7.11.2022.