CELEX: C1999/086/48
Language: en
Date: 1999-03-27 00:00:00
Title: Action brought on 18 January 1999 by Lögstör Rör (Deutschland) GmbH against the Commission of the European Communities (Case T-16/99)

27.3.1999                 EN                        Official Journal of the European Communities                                       C 86/27
The applicant claims:                                                          The applicant has since the outset of the proceedings
                                                                               acknowledged its participation in an infringement, and
                                                                               brings its action only in respect of details of the
I.   As its main application, that the Court                                   infringement and the amount of the fine. Whilst not
     should:                                                                   denying that there has been an infringement of
                                                                               Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty, it seeks the annulment of
                                                                               the contested decision in so far as it infringes the duty to
1. annul the Commission's decision of 21 October 1998                          state reasons and in so far as retrospective application of
     (C(1998) 3117 final), and its decision of 6 November                      the new guidelines on fines' (2) is unlawful.
     1998 (C(1998) 3415 final and C(1998) 3117
     final/corr);
                                                                               The pleas in law and main arguments are essentially the
                                                                               same as in Case T-9/1999.
2. order the Commission to pay the costs.
                                                                               (1) See Case T-9/99.
                                                                               (2) Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to
II. I n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e , t h a t t h e C o u r t s h o u l d :        Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17 and Article 65(5) of the
                                                                                   ECSC Treaty (OJ C 9, 14.1.1998, p. 3).
1. annul Article 1 of the Commission's decision of
     21 October 1998 (C(1998) 3117 final), and of its
     decision of 6 November 1998 (C(1998) 3415 final and
     C(1998) 3117 final/corr) in so far as the applicant is
     accused of participating:
                                                                               Action brought on 18 January 1999 by Lögstör Rör
     (i) in a cartel covering the whole of the common                          (Deutschland) GmbH against the Commission of the
           market                                                                                   European Communities
                                                                                                        (Case T-16/99)
     (ii) in infringements before December 1994, and after
           February 1996                                                                                (1999/C 86/48)
     (iii) in an agreement and the implementation of
                                                                                               (Language of the case: German)
           concerted measures directed against Powerpipe
           AB.
                                                                               An action against the Commission of the European
2. Reduce the fine imposed on the applicant by Article 3                       Communities was brought before the Court of First
     of the decisions by such amount as the Court                              Instance of the European Communities on 18 January
     considers appropriate.                                                    1999 by Lögstör Rör (Deutschland) GmbH, whose
                                                                               registered office is in Fulda (Germany), represented by
                                                                               Hans-Joachim Hellmann, of the firm of Schilling, Zutt
3. Order the Commission to pay the costs.                                      and Anschütz, Rechtsanwälte, Mannheim (Germany), with
                                                                               an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
                                                                               Loesch and Wolter, 11 Rue Goethe.
III. F u r t h e r i n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e , t h a t t h e C o u r t
     should:
                                                                               The applicant claims that the Court should:
1. Reduce the fine imposed on the applicant by Article 3
     of the decisions by such amount as the Court
                                                                               1. annul Commission Decision C(1998) 3117 final/corr
     considers appropriate;
                                                                                    of 21 October 1998 concerning a proceeding under
                                                                                    Article 85 of the EC Treaty (Case IV/35.691/E-4, Fern-
                                                                                    wärmetechnik-Kartell), as amended by Commission
2. Order the Commission to pay the costs.                                           Decision C(1998) 3415 final of 6 November 1998, in
                                                                                    so far as it concerns the applicant,
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
                                                                                    or, in the alternative, reduce the fine;
The applicant was fined ECU 925 000 by the Commission
for participating in a cartel between manufacturers and
distributors of district heating pipes (1).                                    2. order the Commission to pay the costs.
 ---pagebreak--- C 86/28               EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                27.3.1999
Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:                    Instance of the European Communities on 20 January
                                                                       1999 by KE KELIT Kunststoffwerk mbH, Linz (Austria),
The applicant was fined ECU 1 500 000 by the                           represented by the firm of Grassner, Lenz, Thewanger and
Commission for participating in a cartel between                       Partners, Rechtsanwälte, Linz, with an address for service
manufacturers and distributors of district heating pipes (1).          in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Messrs Loesch and
                                                                       Wolter, 11 Rue Goethe.
The applicant pleads:
                                                                       The applicant claims that the Court should:
Ð infringement of the right to a proper hearing;
Ð infringement of the duty to state reasons under                      1. annul Commission Decision C(1998) 3117 final of
     Article 190 of the EC Treaty;                                          21 October 1998 concerning a proceeding under
                                                                            Article 85 of the EC Treaty (Case IV/35.691/E-4, Fern-
                                                                            wärmetechnik-Kartell), as amended by Commission
Ð infringement of the principles of non-retroactivity and                   Decision C(1998) 3415 final of 6 November 1998, in
     the protection of legitimate expectations, and of the                  so far as it concerns the applicant;
     duty of the administration to act in accordance with
     statute;
                                                                            or, in the alternative,
Ð abuse of discretion in applying the guidelines on
     fines (2);
                                                                       2. annul the fine imposed on the applicant;
Ð abuse of discretion and discrimination in applying the
     rules whereby undertakings cooperating with the
     Commission during its investigation into a cartel may                  or, in the alternative,
     be exempted from fines (3);
                                                                       3. reduce the fine imposed on the applicant;
Ð misapplication of heading D of the above rules;
Ð infringement of the principles of equal treatment and                4. order the Commission to pay the costs in any event.
     proportionality, and of the prohibition of arbitrary
     action;
                                                                       Pleas in law and main arguments adduced in support:
Ð inaccuracy of the facts alleged;
                                                                       The applicant was fined ECU 360 000 by the Commission
Ð incorrect assessment of the turnover figures relevant to
                                                                       for participating in a cartel between manufacturers and
     determining the amount of the fine;
                                                                       distributors of district heating pipes. (1)
Ð fixing of an excessive interest rate; and
                                                                       The pleas in law and main arguments are essentially the
Ð erroneous legal assessment.                                          same as in Cases T-9/99 and T-16/99.
(1) See Case T-9/99.                                                   (1) See Case T-9/99.
(2) Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to
    Article 15(2) of Regulation No 17 and Article 65(5) of the
    ECSC Treaty (OJ C 9, 14.1.1998, p. 3).
                                                                       Action brought on 21 January 1999 by Cordis Obst- und
                                                                       Gemüsegrosshandel GmbH against the Commission of the
Action brought on 20 January 1999 by KE KELIT Kunst-                                        European Communities
stoffwerk mbH against Commission of the European
                         Communities                                                            (Case T-18/99)
                        (Case T-17/99)                                                          (1999/C 86/50)
                        (1999/C 86/49)
                                                                                       (Language of the case: German)
                (Language of the case: German)
An action against the Commission of the European                       An action against the Commission of the European
Communities was brought before the Court of First                      Communities was brought before the Court of First