CELEX: 62019CN0148
Language: en
Date: 2019-02-19 00:00:00
Title: Case C-148/19 P: Appeal brought on 19 February 2019 by BTB Holding Investments SA and Duferco Participations Holding SA against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 11 December 2018 in Case T-100/17, BTB Holding Investments SA and Duferco Participations Holding SA v Commission

27.5.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 182/18
            
         
      Appeal brought on 19 February 2019 by BTB Holding Investments SA and Duferco Participations Holding SA against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 11 December 2018 in Case T-100/17, BTB Holding Investments SA and Duferco Participations Holding SA v Commission
      (Case C-148/19 P)
      (2019/C 182/22)
      Language of the case: French
      
         Parties
      
      
         Appellants: BTB Holding Investments SA, Duferco Participations Holding SA (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, R. Luff, M. Favart, Q. Declève, avocats)
      
         Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission, Foreign Strategic Investments Holding (FSIH)
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The appellants submit that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  Set aside the judgment of the General Court of 11 December 2018, BTB Holding Investments and Duferco Participations Holding v Commission (T-100/17);
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Refer the case back to the General Court;
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  Order the defendant to pay the costs of these proceedings and the costs of the proceedings before the General Court.
               
            
         Grounds of appeal and main arguments
      
      By their appeal against judgment T-100/17, the appellants submit that, in the judgment under appeal, the General Court infringed their right to a fair hearing when it stated that, ‘in order to establish that the Commission made a manifest error in the [complex economic] assessment of the facts justifying the annulment of the contested decision, the evidence adduced by the applicant must be sufficient to make the assessment of the facts in the decision at issue implausible’. The appellants submit that, in particular, the General Court infringed the principles relating to the burden of proof and the principle of equality of arms.