Case T-410/21: Action brought on 8 July 2021 — Ferriera Valsabbia and Valsabbia Investimenti v Commission
Date: 2021-07-08
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Italy, bar, cartel, concrete, indemnification, interest, judgment of the Court (EU), limitation of legal proceedings, market-sharing agreement, price agreement








C_2021431EN.01003901.xml










25.10.2021   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 431/39






Action brought on 8 July 2021 — Ferriera Valsabbia and Valsabbia Investimenti v Commission
(Case T-410/21)
(2021/C 431/47)
Language of the case: Italian

Parties


Applicants: Ferriera Valsabbia SpA (Odolo, Italy) and Valsabbia Investimenti SpA (Odolo) (represented by: D. Fosselard, D. Slater and G. Carnazza, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:






—


(i) order the European Union, represented by the Commission, to pay default interest on the amount of EUR 10 250 000 at the rate set by the European Central Bank (ECB) for its principal refinancing operations in force on the first calendar day of the month in which the deadline falls, increased by three and a half percentage points, in respect of the period between 9 March 2010 and 14 November 2017, less interest in the amount of EUR 372 812,31, which has already been received by the applicants, which amounts to a total of EUR 3 174 389,74 or, in the alternative, to pay default interest calculated at the interest rate that the Court considers appropriate;










—


(ii) order the European Union, represented by the Commission, to pay default interest on the amount requested in point (i) above in respect of the period between 14 November 2017 and the date on which that amount is actually paid, at the rate set by the ECB for its principal refinancing operations in force on the first calendar day of the month in which the deadline falls, increased by three and a half percentage points, or, in the alternative, at the interest rate that the Court considers appropriate;










—


(iii) as an alternative to point (ii) above, order the European Union, represented by the Commission, to pay default interest on the amount requested in point (i) in respect of the period between 2 March 2021 and the date on which that amount is actually paid, at the rate set by the ECB for its principal refinancing operations in force on the first calendar day of the month in which the deadline falls, increased by three and a half percentage points, or, in the alternative, at the interest rate that the Court considers appropriate;










—


(iv) in addition or in the alternative, annul Commission communication Ref. Ares(2021) 2904093 of 30 April 2021;










—


(v) order the Commission to pay the costs.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, concerning the application for compensation, alleging incorrect execution by the Commission of the judgment of 21 September 2017, Ferriera Valsabbia and Others v Commission (C-86/15 P and C-87/15 P, EU:C:2017:717) contrary to the first paragraph of Article 266 TFEU and Article 41(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
In this regard, the applicant claims that the Commission has not paid the entire amount of default interest on the penalty repaid following the judgment.










2.


Second plea in law, concerning the application for annulment, alleging infringement and incorrect assessment of Articles 266 and 296 TFEU, infringement and incorrect assessment of Article 46 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, a failure to state reasons in the Commission’s letter of 30 April 2021, and an error in law and manifest error of assessment.
In this regard, the applicant claims that the letter, in which the Commission refused to pay default interest to the applicants, does not contain a sufficient statement of reasons and infringes the principles of limitation.










3.


Third plea in law, concerning the application for annulment, alleging infringement and incorrect assessment of Article 266 TFEU and of Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012. (1)

In this regard, the applicant claims that Article 85a(2) of Delegated Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002, (2) relied on by the Commission in its letter of 30 April 2021, was no longer in force when the penalty was repaid, and therefore was no longer applicable.






(1)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 of 29 October 2012 on the rules of application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ 2012 L 362, p. 1).

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ 2002 L 357, p. 1).