EN Official Journal of the European Union C 425/11

Final Report of the Hearing Officer (1)

Case AT.38238 — Raw Tobacco — Spain — Fine amendment decision

(2017/C 425/08)

In Decision C(2004) 4030 final of 20 October 2004 in Case AT.38238 – Raw Tobacco – Spain (the ‘2004 Decision’), the Commission found, among other things, that World Wide Tobacco España, SA (‘WWTE’) had infringed Article 81(1) EC between 1996 and 2001. The 2004 Decision held WWTE’s then parent companies, Standard Commercial Corporation (‘SCC’), Standard Commercial Tobacco Co. Inc. (‘SCTC’) and Trans-Continental Leaf Tobacco Corporation Ltd (‘TCLT’), jointly and severally liable with WWTE for the fine imposed in connection with WWTE’s infringing conduct. After provisionally paying this fine on behalf of itself and these parents, WWTE saw its liability reduced by EUR 243 000 by the General Court (2). In a separate action brought by Alliance One International Inc. (‘AOI’) (3) together with SCTC (4) and TCLT, the General Court annulled the 2004 Decision insofar as it related to TCLT, but not AOI or SCTC (5).

In the light of the reduction in WWTE’s fine, the draft decision is designed to amend the 2004 Decision by lowering, in line with the reduction obtained by WWTE, the amount of the fine for which SCC and SCTC are held jointly and severally liable. Since SCC and SCTC were jointly liable for the same amount, the Commission services consider it sufficient to impose a single reduced fine on AOI, which, as legal successor of SCC and SCTC, has assumed the liability imposed by the 2004 Decision on these entities. When given the opportunity to make known its views in December 2015, AOI confirmed that that such a decision could be addressed to it rather than to SCC and SCTC.

The draft decision does not modify the objections underlying the 2004 Decision. It deals only with fining matters related to the parental liability of SCC and SCTC for the conduct of WWTE. It does not affect the amount of the fine for which WWTE was definitively found liable. Accordingly, even though, as can be seen from Recital 9 of the draft decision, the Commission — despite its repeated efforts — was unsuccessful in seeking the views of WWTE, it more than fulfilled its obligations towards WWTE in terms of the right to be heard. AOI has made use of the opportunity afforded to it of making known its views. Overall, I consider that the effective exercise of procedural rights has thus far been respected in the procedure relating to the draft decision.

Brussels, 31 May 2017. Joos STRAGIER

(1) Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 29).

(2) Judgment in World Wide Tobacco España v Commission (T-37/05, EU:T:2011:76) upheld on appeal in Order in World Wide Tobacco España v Commission (C-240/11 P, EU:C:2012:269).

(3) AOI was formed by the merger in May 2005 of SCC and Dimon Inc.

(4) Which merged with AOI in June 2005.

(5) Judgment in Alliance One and Others v Commission (T-24/05, EU:T:2010:453) upheld on appeal in judgment in Alliance One and Others v Commission (C-628/10 P and C-14/11 P, EU:C:2012:479).