Order of the President of the Court of 20 April 2012 — Fapricela v Commission

(Case C-507/11 P(R))

‛Application for interim measures — Competition — Decision of the Commission imposing a fine — Bank guarantee — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Financial damage — Lack of exceptional circumstances — Lack of urgency’

1. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Suspension of operation of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding to immediate recovery of a fine imposed — Conditions for granting — Serious and irreparable damage — Impossible to obtain a bank guarantee — Extent of the burden of proof (Art. 278 TFEU) (see paras 33-36, 41, 53-56)

2. Applications for interim measures — Procedure — Whether appropriate to hear the parties — Whether appropriate to admit additional observations and documents after the ending of the written or oral procedure — Discretion of the judge hearing the application for interim relief (Art. 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 39, first para., and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 105) (see paras 49-51)

3. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Suspension of operation of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding to immediate recovery of a fine imposed — Conditions for granting — Serious and irreparable damage — Taking account of the situation of the group to which the undertaking belongs and of its shareholders — Necessity of providing, at the time of making the application, information concerning the financial capacity of the undertaking’s shareholders (Art. 278 TFEU) (see paras 67-69)

4. Appeals — Grounds — Plea raised against a ground of the judgment not necessary in order for the operative part to be founded — Plea ineffective (see para. 72)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2011 in Case T-398/10 R Fapricela v Commission, by which that court dismissed an application for suspension of the operation of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.344 — Pre-stressing steel), inter alia, in so far as it imposes the obligation to set up a bank guarantee in order to avoid immediate recovery of the fine imposed under Article 2 of that decision.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. Fapricela — Indústria de Trefilaria SA is ordered to pay the costs.

Order of the President of the Court of 20 April 2012 — Fapricela v Commission

(Case C-507/11 P(R))

‛Application for interim measures — Competition — Decision of the Commission imposing a fine — Bank guarantee — Application for suspension of operation of a measure — Financial damage — Lack of exceptional circumstances — Lack of urgency’

1. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Suspension of operation of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding to immediate recovery of a fine imposed — Conditions for granting — Serious and irreparable damage — Impossible to obtain a bank guarantee — Extent of the burden of proof (Art. 278 TFEU) (see paras 33-36, 41, 53-56)

2. Applications for interim measures — Procedure — Whether appropriate to hear the parties — Whether appropriate to admit additional observations and documents after the ending of the written or oral procedure — Discretion of the judge hearing the application for interim relief (Art. 278 TFEU and 279 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 39, first para., and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 105) (see paras 49-51)

3. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Suspension of operation of the obligation to provide a bank guarantee as a condition for not proceeding to immediate recovery of a fine imposed — Conditions for granting — Serious and irreparable damage — Taking account of the situation of the group to which the undertaking belongs and of its shareholders — Necessity of providing, at the time of making the application, information concerning the financial capacity of the undertaking’s shareholders (Art. 278 TFEU) (see paras 67-69)

4. Appeals — Grounds — Plea raised against a ground of the judgment not necessary in order for the operative part to be founded — Plea ineffective (see para. 72)

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2011 in Case T-398/10 R Fapricela v Commission, by which that court dismissed an application for suspension of the operation of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.344 — Pre-stressing steel), inter alia, in so far as it imposes the obligation to set up a bank guarantee in order to avoid immediate recovery of the fine imposed under Article 2 of that decision.

Operative part

1. The appeal is dismissed.