do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Case C-699/19 P: Appeal brought on 20 September 2019 by Quanta Storage, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 12 July 2019 in Case T-772/15: Quanta Storage, Inc. v European Commission
Date: 2019-09-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU competition policy, cartel, control of restrictive practices, disc drive, optical medium, restriction on competition, right to justice, rights of the defence, sanction (EU), tendering








C_2019406EN.01001601.xml










2.12.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 406/16






Appeal brought on 20 September 2019 by Quanta Storage, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 12 July 2019 in Case T-772/15: Quanta Storage, Inc. v European Commission
(Case C-699/19 P)
(2019/C 406/23)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Appellant: Quanta Storage, Inc. (represented by: B. Hartnett, Barrister, O. Geiss, Rechtsanwalt, W. Sparks, advocaat, T. Siakka, Δικηγόρος)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:






a)


set aside the contested judgment insofar as it dismisses the action and orders Quanta Storage to bear its own costs and to pay four fifths of the costs incurred by the Commission;










b)


annul the Commission Decision of 21 October 2015 (Case AT39639 – Optical disc drives) insofar as it relates to the appellant;










c)


in the alternative, reduce the fine imposed on the appellant;










d)


in the alternative, refer the case back to the General Court; and










e)


order the Commission to bear all costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the appellant relies on the following five pleas.
First Plea: alleging that the General Court failed to apply the relevant legal test and distorted the clear sense of evidence in relation to the breach of the rights of defence by the Commission’s finding of several infringements.
Second Plea: alleging that the General Court distorted the clear sense of evidence concerning the right of defence and the right to good administration.
Third Plea: alleging that General Court failed to deal with a relevant point or to understand it properly and/or failed to apply the correct legal test in relation to contradictions concerning the scope of the infringement.
Fourth Plea: alleging a distortion of the clear sense of evidence, failure to apply the correct legal test and/or failure to deal with a relevant point or to understand it properly as regards the Appellant’s liability under Article 101 TFEU.
Fifth Plea: alleging a breach of unlimited jurisdiction, distortion of the clear sense of evidence and defective reasoning in relation to the setting of the fine.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.9483 — Engie/Powerlines) (Text with EEA relevance) 2020/C 351/03
Date: 2019-09-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission
Subjects: economic concentration, electrical energy, energy grid, energy industry, gas industry, merger control, rail transport








C_2020351EN.01000301.xml










21.10.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 351/3






Non-opposition to a notified concentration
(Case M.9483 — Engie/Powerlines)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2020/C 351/03)
On 20 September 2019, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:






—


in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,










—


in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32019M9483. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law.






(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.