CELEX: 62019CN0700
Language: en
Date: 2019-09-20 00:00:00
Title: Case C-700/19 P: Appeal brought on 20 September 2019 by Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp., Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corp. against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 12/07/2019 in Case T-8/16: Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology, Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea v Commission

11.11.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 383/52
            
         
      Appeal brought on 20 September 2019 by Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp., Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corp. against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 12/07/2019 in Case T-8/16: Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology, Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea v Commission
      (Case C-700/19 P)
      (2019/C 383/61)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Appellant: Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp., Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Korea Corp. (hereinafter refferd to as the appellants) (represented by: M. Bay, avvocato, J. Ruiz Calzado, abogado, A. Aresu, avvocato)
      
         Other party to the proceedings: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The appellants claim that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  set aside the Judgment of the General Court under appeal;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  annul the Commission decision in case COMP/39.639 – Optical Disk Drives at issue in so far as it concerns the appellants;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  annul or reduce the amount of the fine imposed on the appellants in that decision;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the Commission to bear the entirety of the costs at first instance and on appeal; and
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  make any other order as may be appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the appeal, the appellants rely on four pleas in law.
      First plea in law, alleging errors in law as regards limbs one, two and three of the first plea at first instance, consisting of infringements of essential procedural requirements and of the rights of defence.
      Second plea in law, alleging errors of law in stating the legal standard for the existence of a single and continuous infringement.
      Third plea in law, alleging violation of the rights of defence and erroneous legal standard.
      Fourth plea in law, alleging failure to comply with essential procedural requirements; full inadequacy of the statement of reasons supporting the rejection of the second plea, first part (lack of jurisdiction), at first instance; and errors in the legal test governing the admissibility of evidence.