Case T-194/06: Action brought on 18 July 2006 — SNIA v Commission
Date: 2006-07-18
Institutions: Court of First Instance
Subjects: European Commission, action for annulment (EU), chemical industry, chemical salt, control of restrictive practices, exchange of information, fine, oxide, price agreement, restriction on competition

2.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/43

Action brought on 18 July 2006 — SNIA v Commission

(Case T-194/06)

(2006/C 212/73)

Language of the case: Italian

agents, and that, as already stated, the Commission has not
in any way demonstrated decisive influence by Caffaro
S.p.A. over ICC.

— that the only party responsible for the presumed infringe-
ment is ICC (now Caffaro S.r.l.), which, moreover, has not
ceased to exist as a legal entity but has merely changed its
name. On the other hand, even if one were to hold that
Caffaro S.p.A. was responsible for the presumed infringe-
ment, the legal sucessor of the latter is Caffaro S.r.l. and not
SNIA.

Parties

Applicant(s): SNIA S.p.A. (represented by: Alberto Santa Maria
and Claudi Biscaretti di Rufia, lawyers,)

Defendant(s): Commission of the European Communities

Action brought on 18 July 2006 — Solvay Solexis SpA v
Commission

Forms of order sought

— Annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 1766 final of
3 May 2006 in Case COMP/F/38.620 — Hydrogen peroxide
and sodium perborate in so far as it imposes on SNIA S.p.A.,
jointly and severally with Caffaro S.r.l.,
fine of
EUR 1 078 000.

a

— The Commission to pay the costs.

Parties

(Case T-195/06)

(2006/C 212/74)

Language of the case: Italian

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant: Solvay Solexis SpA (represented by: Tommaso Salo-
nico and Gian Luca Zampa, lawyers)

The contested decision in this case is the same as in Case T-
185/06 L'air Liquide v Commission.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

In that decision, the Commission maintains that, at the time of
the facts, Industrie Chimiche Caffaro S.p.A. (ICC) was manage-
rially dependent not only on Caffaro S.p.A., a company quoted
on the Italian stock exchange and controlling ICC as to 100 %,
but also on the applicant, a majority shareholder of Caffaro
S.p.A. of between 53 % and 59 %. Essentially on the basis of
that indirect link, the applicant is considered jointly and sever-
ally liable for the infringement of which the Commission
accuses Caffaro S.r.l.

In support of its arguments, the applicant claims:

— that the Commission has not established a relationship of
dependency between SNIA and ICC during the period in
question. Nor has it demonstrated the existence, during the
same period, of such a relationship between Caffaro S.p.A.
and ICC.

Form of order sought

— annul the decision in part, in particular Articles 1, 2 and 3
thereof, and reduce the penalty imposed on Solexis accord-
ingly;

— order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings,
including the applicant's costs with regard to the payment
in whole or in part of the penalty or in respect of provision
of the bank guarantee.

Pleas in law and main arguments

— that, as regards the relevance of

the merger between
Caffaro S.p.A. and SNIA for the purposes of identifying a
decisive influence of SNIA, the Commission ignored the
fact that the merger by incorporation of Caffaro S.p.A. into
SNIA S.p.A. (like the change of the company name of ICC
to Caffaro S.p.A., now Caffaro S.r.l.) occurred in 2000, that
is to say a year after the exit from the market in bleaching

The contested decision in this case is the same as that in Case
T-185/06 L'Air Liquide v Commission. That decision laid down
that Solexis is jointly and severally liable with Edison SpA for a
fine of EUR 25 619 million. The applicant's liability derives
exclusively from the conduct of the company Ausimont SA
which, at the time of the facts, was subject to sole control by
Edison.