Case T-12/06: Action brought on  19 January 2006  — Deltafina v Commission
Date: 2006-01-19
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), fine, tobacco industry, unlawful agreement

11.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 60/49

— That the finding that the duration of the applicant's partici-
pation in the cartel was two years and eight months is the
result of a clear error of appraisal;

— That the Commission failed to take account of two miti-
gating circumstances: the purely passive role played by the
applicant in the cartel, and the frequent confusion as to the
aims of the agreements;

— That the fine in question, which is almost double its assets,

is unjust and disproportionate.

In support of its claims, the applicant pleads:

— that it informed the Commission in advance that it would
be impossible for it not to reveal that it had submitted the
request for favourable treatment;

— that the Commission had accepted that it was impossible
for Deltafina not to reveal that it had submitted a request
for favourable treatment;

— that the Commission officials did not inform Deltafina that
its announcement
for
favourable treatment would entail the loss of conditional
immunity;

it had submitted a request

that

Action brought on 19 January 2006 — Deltafina v
Commission

(Case T-12/06)

(2006/C 60/91)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Deltafina (Rome, Italy) (represented by: F. Di Gianni,
R. Jacchia, A. Terranova, I. van Bael and J. F. Bellis)

Defendant: European Commission

— that Deltafina did not submit its own request for favourable
treatment in concert with its principal competitors; and

— that Deltafina's disclosure that it had submitted a request
for favourable treatment in no way prejudiced the Commis-
sion's investigation.

As regards the reduction of the fine, the applicant submits that:

— The basic amount of the fine imposed by the Commission
is clearly excessive and disproportionate, having regard to
the market concerned, Deltafina's
the modest value of
reduced turnover and the fact that the breach did not have
any impact on the market;

— The Commission erroneously attributed Deltafina's conduct

to its parent company;

— The reduction of the fine and the assessment of mitigating
circumstances do not adequately reflect the specific facts of
the case, in the light, in particular, of the new interpretative
practices under the 2002 Notice.

Form of order sought

(1) OJ C 45, 19.2.2002, p. 3.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— annul

the fine or,

in the alternative,

reduce the fine

imposed on it pursuant to Article 2 of the Decision;

— order the Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in the present case seeks the annulment of the
fine of EUR 30 million imposed on it pursuant to Article 2 of
the contested Decision, which is the same as that in issue in
Case T-11/06 Romana Tabacchi v Commission, on the ground
that the Commission unlawfully deprived it of the immunity
from fines which was granted pursuant to point 8(b) of the
Commission Notice of 2002 on immunity from fines and
reduction of fines in cartel cases (1).

the defendant
that
It should be explained in this respect
revoked the conditional
immunity granted to the applicant
because of the latter's announcement, made during a meeting
of the Governing Board of the Associazione Professionale Tras-
formatori Tabacchi Italiani (Italian Professional Association of
Tobacco Processors), that it had made a request for favourable
treatment to the Commission.

Action brought on 20 January 2006 — Mindo v Commis-
sion

(Case T-19/06)

(2006/C 60/92)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Mindo Srl (Rome, Italy) [represented by: J. Folguera
Crespo, P. Vidal Martínez, lawyers]

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities