Case T-185/18: Action brought on 14 March 2018 — Lucchini v Commission
Date: 2018-03-14
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: EU competition policy, bar, cartel, concrete, control of restrictive practices, fine, fixing of prices, indemnification, price agreement, rights of the defence








C_2018161EN.01007002.xml










7.5.2018   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 161/70





Action brought on 14 March 2018 — Lucchini v Commission
(Case T-185/18)
(2018/C 161/88)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicant: Lucchini SpA (Livorno, Italy) (represented by: G. Belotti, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


Take account of the infringements established in the judgments of the Court of Justice annulling Commission Decision C (2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009 concerning an infringement of Article 65 CS (Case COMP/37.956 — Reinforcing bars, re-adoption), and accordingly annul the Commission’s rejection decision contained in the letter of 17 January 2018 and order the Commission to reimburse to the applicant the fine unlawfully imposed and paid, together with interest;










—


Annul the Commission’s rejection decision contained in the letter of 9 March 2018 and order the Commission to allow the applicant to take part in procedure COMP/37.956, which will have to be reopened by the Commission in order to comply with the judgments of the Court of Justice;










—


In the alternative, order compensation to be paid to the applicant in the amount of not less than EUR 10 million or another amount to be determined during the course of the proceedings or whatever amount the Court deems equitable as an adequate penalty for the established infringement of Article 41 of the Charter.





Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant points out that the Court of Justice has annulled Commission Decision C (2009) 7492 final of 30 September 2009 concerning an infringement of Article 65 CS (Case COMP/37.956 — Reinforcing bars) (1) and states that, in disregard of the wording of that annulment, the defendant has refused to reimburse the fine paid and has not invited the applicant to participate in the administrative procedure, which has been reopened in the meantime.
In support of its action, the applicant raises two pleas in law.






1.


Infringement of Articles 10 to 14 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (Text with EEA relevance), (2) in particular the infringement of the applicant’s right to a fair hearing in accordance with the law and, first and foremost, of its rights of defence.






—


In this regard, the applicant submits that the participation of Member States in hearings is not a pure formality, as the competition authorities are part of the committee which must be consulted by the Commission before it takes any decision. Those competition authorities must always take part in plenary hearings, the crux of the proceedings in which the undertakings’ defence and the Commission’s case are heard inter partes.














2.


Infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the right to good administration.






(1)  Judgments of 21 September 2017: Feralpi v Commission, C-85/15 P (EU:C:2017:709); Joined Cases C-86/15 P, Ferriera Valsabbia v Commission, and C-87/15 P, Alfa Acciai v Commission (EU:C:2017:717); Ferriere Nord v Commission, C-88/15 P (EU:C:2017:716); and Riva Fire v Commission, C-89/15 P, (EU:C:2017:713).

(2)  OJ 2004 L 123, p. 18.