CELEX: C2002/156/24
Language: en
Date: 2002-06-29 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 20 March 2002 in Case T-9/99, HFB Holding für Fernwärmetechnik Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and Others v Commission of the European Communities (Competition — Cartel — District heating pipes — Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC) — Boycott — Fine — Guidelines on setting fines — Objection of illegality — Non-retroactivity — Rights of defence — Leniency notice)

29.6.2002              EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                            C 156/13
                                                        COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                     JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                  of 20 March 2002
                        of 24 April 2002
                                                                         in Case T-9/99, HFB Holding für Fernwärmetechnik Betei-
                                                                         ligungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and Others v Com-
in Case T-220/96: Elliniki Viomichania Oplon AE (EVO) v                             mission of the European Communities (1)
Council of the European Union and Commission of the
                   European Communities (1)
                                                                         (Competition — Cartel — District heating pipes —
                                                                         Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC) — Boycott —
                                                                         Fine — Guidelines on setting fines — Objection of illegality
(Non-contractual liability for an unlawful act — Regulation              — Non-retroactivity — Rights of defence — Leniency notice)
(EEC) No 2340/90 — Embargo on trade with Iraq —
Impairment of rights equivalent to expropriation — Causal
                                                                                                   (2002/C 156/24)
                                link)
                                                                                             (Language of the case: German)
                         (2002/C 156/23)
                                                                         In Case T-9/99: HFB Holding für Fernwärmetechnik Beteili-
                    (Language of the case: Greek)                        gungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, established in Rosenheim
                                                                         (Germany), HFB Holding für Fernwärmetechnik Beteiligungs-
                                                                         gesellschaft mbH, Verwaltungsgesellschaft, established in
                                                                         Rosenheim, Isoplus Fernwärmetechnik Vertriebsgesellschaft
                                                                         mbH, established in Rosenheim, Isoplus Fernwärmetechnik
                                                                         Gesellschaft mbH, established in Hohenberg Austria, Isoplus
In Case T-220/96, Elliniki Viomichania Oplon AE (EVO),                   Fernwärmetechnik GmbH, established in Sondershausen (Ger-
established in Athens (Greece), represented by T. Fortsakis,             many), represented by P. Krömer and F. Nusterer, lawyers, with
lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg, v Council             an address for service in Luxembourg, against Commission of
of the European Union (Agent: S. Kyriakopoulou) and Com-                 the European Communities (Agents: W. Mölls and É. Gippini
mission of the European Communities (Agent: M. Condou-                   Fournier) — application for, primarily, annulment of Com-
Durande): Application for compensation for the damage                    mission Decision 1999/60/EC of 21 October 1998 relating to
allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the adoption          a proceeding under Article 85 of the EC Treaty (Case No IV/
of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2340/90 of 8 August 1990                  35.691/E-4: — Pre-Insulated Pipe Cartel) (OJ 1999 L 24, p. 1)
preventing trade by the Community as regards Iraq and Kuwait             or, in the alternative, reduction of the fine imposed on the
(OJ 1990 L 213, p. 1), the Court of First Instance (Fourth               applicants by that decision — the Court of First Instance
Chamber), composed of: P. Mengozzi, President, V. Tiili and              (Fourth Chamber), composed of P. Mengozzi, President, V. Tiili
R.M. Moura Ramos, Judges; J. Palacio González, Administrator,           and R.M. Moura Ramos, Judges; J. Palacio González, Adminis-
for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 24 April 2002, in             trator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 20 March
which it:                                                                2002, in which it:
                                                                         1.    Annuls Articles 3(d) and 5(d) of Commission Decision 1999/
1.    Dismisses the application;                                               60/EC of 21 October 1999 relating to a proceeding under
                                                                               Article 85 of the EC Treaty (Case No IV/35.691.E-4: — Pre-
                                                                               Insulated Pipe Cartel) in so far as it relates to HFB Holding für
2.    Orders the applicant to pay the costs.                                   Fernwärmetechnik Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG and
                                                                               HFB Holding für Fernwärmetechnik Beteiligungsgesellschaft
                                                                               mbH, Verwaltungsgesellschaft;
                                                                         2.    Dismisses the remainder of the application;
(1) OJ C 54 of 22.2.1997.
                                                                         3.    Orders the applicants jointly and severally to bear their own
                                                                               costs, including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings,
                                                                               and to pay 80 % of the costs incurred by the Commission,
                                                                               including those relating to the interlocutory proceedings;
 ---pagebreak--- C 156/14                 EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                     29.6.2002
4.    Orders the Commission to bear 20 % of its own costs, including                          JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
      those relating to the interlocutory proceedings.
                                                                                                     of 20 March 2002
(1) OJ C 86 of 27.3.1999.
                                                                            in Case T-16/99, Lögstör Rör (Deutschland) GmbH v
                                                                                    Commission of the European Communities (1)
                                                                            (Competition — Cartel — District heating pipes —
                                                                            Article 85 of the EC Treaty (now Article 81 EC) — Boycott
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                     — Access to the file — Fine — Guidelines on the method of
                                                                            setting fines — Non-retroactivity — Legitimate expec-
                                                                                                           tations)
                          of 20 March 2002
in Case T-15/99, Brugg Rohrsysteme GmbH v Com-
          mission of the European Communities (1)                                                     (2002/C 156/26)
(Competition — Cartel — District heating pipes —
Article 85 of the EC Treaty (now Article 81 EC) — Boycott                                      (Language of the case: German)
— fine — Guidelines on setting fines — Non-retroactivity
                    — Legitimate expectation)
                           (2002/C 156/25)
                   (Language of the case: German)                           In Case T-16/99, Lögstör Rör (Deutschland) GmbH, established
                                                                            in Fulda (Germany), represented by H.-J. Hellmann and T. Näg-
                                                                            ele, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against
                                                                            Commission of the European Communities (Agents: W. Mölls
In Case T-15/99, Brugg Rohrsysteme GmbH, established in                     and E. Gippini Fournier) — application for, primarily, annul-
Wunstorf (Germany), represented by T. Jestaedt, H.-C. Salger                ment of Commission Decision 1999/60/EC of 21 October
and M. Sura, lawyers, with an address for service in Luxem-                 1998 relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EC
bourg, against Commission of the European Communities                       Treaty (Case No IV/35.691/E-4: — Pre-Insulated Pipe Cartel)
(Agents: W. Mölls and É. Gippini Fournier) — application for               (OJ 1999 L 24, p. 1) or, in the alternative, reduction of the fine
annulment of Commission Decision 1999/60/EC of 21 Octo-                     imposed on the applicant by that decision — the Court of
ber 1998 relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EC                First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of P. Mengozzi,
Treaty (Case No IV/35.691/E-4: — Pre-Insulated Pipe Cartel)                 President, V. Tiili, and R.M. Moura Ramos, Judges; B. Pastor,
(OJ 1999 L 24, p. 1) or, in the alternative, for reduction of the           Principle Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment
fine imposed on the applicant by that decision — the Court of               on 20 March 2002, in which it:
First Instance (Fourth Chamber), composed of P. Mengozzi,
President, V. Tiili and R.M. Moura Ramos, Judges; G. Herzig,
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
20 March 2002, in which it:                                                 1.     Dismisses the application;
1.    Dismisses the application;
                                                                            2.     Orders the applicant to pay the costs.
2.    Orders the applicant to pay the costs.
                                                                            (1) OJ C 86 of 27.3.1999.
(1) OJ C 86 of 27.3.1999.