Case C-448/11 P: Appeal brought on 31 August 2011 by SNIA SpA against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Sixth Chamber, extended composition) on 16 June 2011 in Case T-194/06 SNIA v Commission
Date: 2011-08-31
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: competition, infringement of EU law, liability, merger








C_2011311EN.01002901.xml










22.10.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 311/29





Appeal brought on 31 August 2011 by SNIA SpA against the judgment delivered by the General Court (Sixth Chamber, extended composition) on 16 June 2011 in Case T-194/06 SNIA v Commission
(Case C-448/11 P)
2011/C 311/47
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Appellant: SNIA SpA (represented by: A. Santa Maria, C. Biscaretti di Ruffia and E. Gambaro, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought







—


Set aside the judgment dismissing SNIA SpA’s application and, accordingly, annul Commission Decision C(2006) 1766 final of 3 May 2006 in so far as it includes SNIA SpA among the addressees of the decision, imposing on it, jointly and severally with Caffaro Srl, a fine of EUR 1 078 million;










—


In the alternative, refer the case back to the General Court for a fresh decision in accordance with any guidance and criteria which the Court is minded to provide in the present appeal proceedings;










—


In any event, order the Commission to pay the costs of both sets of proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

By its first ground of appeal, SNIA claims that the General Court erred in law in that it automatically assumed that SNIA was liable on the basis that it had merged with Caffaro SpA and misapplied the rules governing the attribution of liability in competition matters, in particular with regard to what is referred to as the criterion of ‘economic continuity’, and the rules relating to the burden of proof. According to the appellant, the court at first instance also incorrectly categorised the case and distorted some of the evidence.
By its second ground of appeal, SNIA claims that the judgment under appeal failed to establish the inconsistency between the statement of objections and the contested decision with regard to the merger of SNIA and Caffaro SpA. In particular, the appellant alleges that the General Court infringed and misapplied Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, (1) breach of its rights of defence and incorrect legal characterisation and distortion of the facts and evidence.
By the third ground of appeal, SNIA alleges misapplication of Article 296 TFEU, incorrect appraisal of the evidence such as distort its content and scope and breach of the rights of the defence. In particular, the appellant criticises the judgment under appeal in that if failed to establish that the reasons given in the contested decision were inadequate and contradictory, in so far as it concluded that SNIA was jointly and severally liable. Moreover, the appellant claims ‘distortion’ of the content of the contested decision and breach of its rights of defence, since the General Court found that it was liable on the basis of factors upon which SNIA did not have the opportunity to comment, either during the administrative procedure or the proceedings at first instance.


(1)  OJ 2003 L 1. p. 1.