Case T-26/05: Action brought on 18 January 2005 by the Italian Republic against the Commission of the European Communities
Date: 2005-03-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: EU financing arrangements, European Commission, Italy, action for annulment (EU), eligible region, financial control, principle of proportionality, regional aid

C 69/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.3.2005

The applicants claim that the Court should:

— annul Article 1 insofar as it relates to the companies listed
in Article 1 (h), (i) and (j) and annul Article 2 (f) of the
Commission Decision dated 3 September 2004 and
amended by written procedure on 20 October 2004 in case
COMP/E-1/38.069-copper plumbing tubes;

— alternatively, reduce the fines imposed on the applicants;

The applicants furthermore claim that the Commission violated
the principle of non-discrimination and made a manifest error
in finding that the applicants participated without interruption
in the arrangements while no continuity could be established in
respect of certain other undertakings. According to the appli-
cants, their situation is identical to that of those other under-
takings. The applicants also invoke in this respect a violation of
their rights of defence in that the Commission relied in the
decision on elements that had not been taken into considera-
tion in the statement of objections.

— order the Commission to pay the costs.

Finally, the applicants submit a violation of the principle of
proportionality in the determination of the fines.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In the contested decision, the Commission found an infringe-
ment of Article 81(1) EC and Article 53(1) EEA by several
undertakings in the copper plumbing sector. The infringement
comprised three separate manifestations: arrangements among
the so-called SANCO producers, arrangements among the so
called WICU and Cuprotherm producers and arrangements
among the broader group of copper plumbing tube producers.
According to the decision, the applicants were not aware or
could not have reasonably foreseen the SANCO arrangements
and the WICU and Cuprotherm arrangements.

In support of their application, the applicants submit a viola-
tion of the principle of non-discrimination. According to the
applicants, the Commission favoured, because of the way it
conducted its investigation, some of
the undertakings. The
applicants state that they were the last companies to receive a
request for information and therefore were also the last to
apply for leniency, resulting in only a 10 % reduction of the
fine on that ground.

The applicants furthermore submit that the Commission erred
in finding that the SANCO arrangements were not significantly
tighter than the arrangements in the broader group. They also
submit that the absence of differentiation at the level of the
fines between the participants in the SANCO arrangements and
participants in the broader group of producers, violates the
principle of non-discrimination and the principle according to
which responsibility for violating competition law is personal
in nature.

The applicants also contest the conclusion to impose the same
fine on the applicants and the producers that participated in
the broader arrangement and the WICU and Cuprotherm
this conclusion
arrangements. The applicants
the principle
violates
according to which responsibility for violating competition law
is personal in nature and that the decision is not sufficiently
reasoned on this point.

the principle of non-discrimination,

submit

that

Action brought on 18 January 2005 by the Italian Republic
against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-26/05)

(2005/C 69/46)

(Language of the case: Italian)

An action against the Commission of the European Commu-
nities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the
European Communities on 18 January 2005 by the Italian
Republic,
represented by Antonio Cingolo, avvocato dello
Stato.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

1. annul:

— the memorandum of 9 November 2004 SPD – Emilia-

Romagna;

— the memorandum of 10 November 2004 NOP Research;

— the memorandum of 12 November 2004 SPD Piemonte,
PEP Calabria, PEP Molise, SPD Toscana, PEP Sicilia, SPD
Marche, SPD Friuli-Venezia Giulia, PEP Campania, SPD
Liguria;

— the memorandum of 16 November 2004 SPD

Lombardia, SPD Veneto;

— the memorandum of 17 November 2004 SPD Lazio;

— the memorandum of 18 November 2004 NOP Local

enterprise development;

19.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/27

— the memorandum of 22 November 2004 PEP Sicilia;

Removal from the Register of Case T-189/04 (1)

— the memorandum of 24 November 2004 PEP Puglia;

— the memorandum of 29 November 2004 SPD IP Trento;

— the memorandum of 16 December 2004 PEP Puglia;

— the memorandum of 17 December 2004 PEP Campania;

— the memorandum of 10 January 2005 NOP Local enter-

prise development.

2. order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those put
forward in Case T-345/04 Italian Republic v Commission (1).

(1) OJ C 262 of 23.10.2004, p. 55.

(2005/C 69/47)

(Language of the case: French)

the Court of First

By order of 16 December 2004, the President of the Fourth
Chamber of
the European
Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of
Case T-189/04, Christian van der Haegen v European
Economic and Social Committee.

Instance of

(1) OJ C 217 of 28.8.2004.