CELEX: 62006TJ0206
Language: en
Date: 2011-06-07
Title: Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 June 2011.#Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA v European Commission.#Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for methacrylates - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Imputability of the unlawful conduct - Rights of the defence - Presumption of innocence - Duty to state reasons - Principle of equal treatment - Principle that penalties must fit the offence - Principle of nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege - Principle of sound administration - Principle of legal certainty - Misuse of powers - Fines - Attribution of liability for payment within a group of companies.#Case T-206/06.

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 June 2011 – Total and Elf Aquitaine v Commission
      (Case T-206/06)
      Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for methacrylates – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Imputability of the unlawful conduct – Rights of the defence – Presumption of innocence – Duty to state reasons – Principle of equal treatment – Principle that penalties must fit the offence – Principle of nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege – Principle of sound administration – Principle of legal certainty – Misuse of powers – Fines – Attribution of liability for payment within a group of companies
      1.                     Competition – Community rules – Infringements – Attribution – Parent company and subsidiaries – Economic unit – Criteria for
            assessment – Presumption of decisive influence exercised by the parent company over its wholly‑owned subsidiaries (Arts 81
            EC and 82 EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2)) (see paras 45-48, 115-116, 205)
      2.                     Competition – Community rules – Infringements – Attribution – Parent company and subsidiaries – Economic unit – Criteria for
            assessment – Presumption of decisive influence exercised by the parent company over its wholly‑owned subsidiaries – Subsidiary
            held by a holding company – Fact not sufficient to reverse the presumption (Arts 81 EC and 82 EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003,
            Art. 23(2)) (see paras 78-79, 85)
      3.                     Competition – Administrative procedure – Statement of objections – Necessary content – Observance of the rights of the defence
            – Undertakings afforded the opportunity to state their views on the facts, objections and circumstances alleged by the Commission
            (Arts 81 EC and 82 EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2)) (see paras 130-133)
      4.                     Acts of the institutions – Statement of reasons – Obligation – Scope – Decision to apply competition rules – Decision relating
            to several addressees – Need for sufficient reasoning, particularly with regard to the entity having to bear the burden of
            an infringement (Arts 81 EC and 253 EC) (see paras 177-178)
      5.                     Competition – Community rules – Infringements – Attribution – Parent company and subsidiaries – Economic unit – Criteria for
            assessment – Presumption of decisive influence exercised by the parent company over its wholly‑owned subsidiaries – Allocation
            of payment of the fine between the various legal entities comprising the economic unit – No infringement of the unitary character
            of the concept of an undertaking (Arts 81 EC and 82 EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2)) (see paras 205-209)
      6.                     Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Deterrent effect – No obligation to take account of fines already imposed for
            other anti-competitive activities (Art. 81 EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23) (see paras 297-298)
      7.                     Competition – Fines – Amount – Determination – Deterrent effect – Account taken of the size and global resources of the fined
            undertaking (Art. 81 EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23) (see para. 303)
      8.                     Procedure – Request that the oral procedure be reopened – Conditions for admissibility – New evidence capable of having a
            decisive impact on the decision (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 62) (see para. 306)
      Re:
      
         
               APPLICATION for annulment of Articles 1(c) and (d), 2(b), 3 and 4 of Commission Decision C(2006) 2098 final of 31 May 2006
                  relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F/38.645 – Methacrylates)
                  and, in the alternative, amendment of Article 2(b) of that decision.
               
            Operative part 
      The Court:
      
         
                  1.
               
               
                  
               
               
                  	Dismisses the action;
               
            
         
                  2.
               
               
                  
               
               
                  	Orders Total SA and Elf Aquitaine SA to pay the costs.