CELEX: 62016TN0902
Language: en
Date: 2016-12-21 00:00:00
Title: Case T-902/16: Action brought on 21 December 2016 — HeidelbergCement v Commission

20.2.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 53/40
            
         Action brought on 21 December 2016 — HeidelbergCement v Commission
   (Case T-902/16)
   (2017/C 053/49)
   Language of the case: English
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: HeidelbergCement AG (Heidelberg, Germany) (represented by: U. Denzel, C. von Köckritz, P. Pichler and H. Weiß, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: European Commission
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               annul the decision of the European Commission No (2016)6591 final of 10 October 2016 to initiate proceedings pursuant to article 6(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) in Case M. 7878 — HeidelbergerCement/Schwenk/Cemex Hungary/Cemex Croatia concerning the envisaged acquisition by Duna-Dráva Cement Kft. of 100 % of the shares in Cemex Hratska dd. and Cemex Hungária Építőanyagok Kft.; and
            
         
               —
            
            
               in any event, order the Commission to pay the applicant’s costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   In support of the action, the applicant relies on one plea in law.
   According to the applicant, the European Commission committed a manifest error of assessment by considering the applicant and Schwenk Zement KG — rather than Duna-Dráva Cement Kft., a full-function joint venture in which the applicant and Schwenk Zement KG each hold respectively a controlling interest of 50 %, as ‘undertakings concerned’ and thus concluded that the transaction has a ‘Union dimension’ within the meaning of article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. According to the applicant, in reality, the European Commission lacks the competence for adopting the contested decision and reviewing the transaction on the basis of the Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004 and the contested decision therefore violates article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) 139/2004 and the underlying principles of legal certainty and subsidiarity.
   First, the applicant puts forward that the European Commission erred in law and committed a manifest error of assessment in relying on paragraph 147 of the Consolidated Jurisdictional Notice (2) in order to qualify the applicant and SchwenkZement KG, rather than Duna-Dráva Cement Kft., as the ‘undertakings concerned’;
   Second, the applicant puts forward that paragraph 147 of the Consolidated Jurisdictional Notice would be unlawful if it could indeed be applied to the case at hand due to a violation of article 1 of the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 and the underlying primary law principles of legal certainty and subsidiarity.
   
      (1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings, OJ, L 24, p. 1.
   
      (2)  Commission Consolidated Jurisdictional Notice under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings, OJ 2008, C 95, p. 1.