CELEX: 62006TN0361
Language: en
Date: 2006-12-05 00:00:00
Title: Case T-361/06: Action brought on 5 December 2006 — Ballast Nedam v Commission

27.1.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 20/26
            
         Action brought on 5 December 2006 — Ballast Nedam v Commission
   (Case T-361/06)
   (2007/C 20/40)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   Parties
   
      Claimant: Ballast Nedam N.V. (represented by: A.R. Bosman and J.M.M. van de Hel, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
   Form of order sought
   
               —
            
            
               annul Commission Decision C(2006) 4090 final of 13 September 2006, notified to the claimant on 25 September 2006, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC (Case No COMP/38.456 — Bitumen — NL), to the extent to which that decision is addressed to the claimant;
            
         
               —
            
            
               in the alternative, annul the decision in part, to the extent to which it is addressed to the claimant, with regard to the duration of the infringement and reduce the fine imposed on the claimant accordingly;
            
         
               —
            
            
               order the Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings.
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
   The claimant is challenging the Commission's decision of 13 September 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC (Case No COMP/38.456 — Bitumen — NL), by which a fine was imposed on the claimant for breach of Article 81 EC.
   According to the claimant, the Commission assumed, on grounds that are legally and factually flawed, that the claimant exercised a determining influence on the market conduct of Ballast Nedam Infra B.V. and Ballast Nedam Grond en Wegen B.V.
   In support of its action, the claimant invokes, in the first place, a breach of Article 81 EC. Second, the claimant submits that there has been an infringement of the general principles of Community law, in particular the principle of the presumption of innocence. In conclusion, the claimant contends that there has been a breach of Article 27(1) of Regulation No 1/2003 and of the rights of the defence in that it was not until the decision that the claimant's liability was assumed. The claimant was thus not given an opportunity to disprove that view by adducing evidence.