CELEX: C1999/333/05
Language: en
Date: 1999-11-20 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 July 1999 in Case C-49/92 P: Commission of the European Communities v Anic Partecipazioni SpA (Appeal - Commission's Rules of Procedure - Procedure for the adoption of a decision by the College of Members of the Commission - Competition rules applicable to undertakings - Concepts of agreement and concerted practice - Responsibility of an undertaking for an infringement as a whole - Attachment of liability for the infringement - Fine)

20.11.1999                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                             C 333/3
                  JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                       JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                          (Second Chamber)
                                                                                                       (Sixth Chamber)
                             of 1 July 1999
in Case C-14/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                                                 of 8 July 1999
the Pretura Circondariale di Torino): Battital Srl v Regione
                              Piemonte (1)
                                                                             in Case C-49/92 P: Commission of the European Com-
                                                                                         munities v Anic Partecipazioni SpA (1)
(Plant health protection — Directive 77/93/EEC — Directi-
ve 92/76/EEC — Ban on the introduction into Italy of
plants of the Citrus genus from non-member countries —                       (Appeal — Commission’s Rules of Procedure — Procedure
                          Limitation in time)                                for the adoption of a decision by the College of Members
                                                                             of the Commission — Competition rules applicable to
                            (1999/C 333/04)                                  undertakings — Concepts of agreement and concerted prac-
                                                                             tice — Responsibility of an undertaking for an infringement
                                                                             as a whole — Attachment of liability for the infringement
                      (Language of the case: Italian)
                                                                                                            — Fine)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                     in the European Court Reports)                                                     (1999/C 333/05)
In Case C-14/98: reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) from the Pretura
Circondariale di Torino (District Magistrate’s Court, Turin),                                     (Language of the case: Italian)
Italy, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending
before that court between Battital Srl and Regione Piemonte
— on the interpretation of Council Directive 77/93/EEC
of 21 December 1976 on protective measures against the                       (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
introduction into the Member States of harmful organisms of                                      in the European Court Reports)
plants or plant products (OJ 1977 L 26, p. 20), as amended, in
particular, by Council Directive 91/683/EEC of 19 December
1991 (OJ 1991 L 376, p. 29) and Commission Directi-                          In Case C-49/92 P: Commission of the European Communities
ve 96/14/Euratom, ECSC, EC of 12 March 1996 (OJ 1996                         (Agent: G. Marenco) — Appeal against the judgment of the
L 68, p. 24), and of Commission Directive 92/76/EEC of                       Court of First Instance of the European Communities (First
6 October 1992 recognising protected zones exposed to                        Chamber) of 17 December 1991 in Case T-6/89 Enichem Anic
particular plant health risks in the Community (OJ 1992                      v Commission [1991] ECR II-1623, seeking to have that
L 305, p. 12), as amended by Commission Directive 95/40/EC                   judgment set aside, the other party to the proceedings being
of 19 July 1995 (OJ 1995 L 182, p. 14) and Commission                        Anic Partecipazioni SpA, formerly Anic SpA, then Enichem
Directive 96/15/EC of 14 March 1996 (OJ 1996 L 70, p. 35)                    Anic SpA, whose registered office is in Palermo, Italy, rep-
— the Court (Second Chamber), composed of: G. Hirsch,                        resented by M. Siragusa and G. Guarino, of the Rome Bar, and
President of the Chamber, G.F. Mancini and R. Schintgen                      G. Scassellati Sforzolini and F.M. Moretti, of the Bologna Bar,
(Rapporteur), Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl,              with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of
Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment             Arendt & Medernach, 8-10 Rue Mathias Hardt — the Court
on 1 July 1999, in which it held:                                            (Sixth Chamber), composed of: P.J.G. Kapteyn, President of the
                                                                             Chamber, G. Hirsch, G.F. Mancini (Rapporteur), J.L. Murray
                                                                             and H. Ragnemalm, Judges; G. Cosmas, Advocate General;
The ban on importing fruits of the Citrus genus into the protected           H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, and D. Louterman-Hubeau,
zone Italy, set out in Article 4(2)(a) of Council Directive 77/93/EEC        Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment
of 21 December 1976 on protective measures against the introduc-             on 8 July 1999, in which it:
tion into the Member States of harmful organisms of plants or plant
products, ceased to apply in that Member State on 1 April 1996,
the date on which recognition of Italy as a protected zone under             1. Annuls point 1, second and third indents, of the operative part
Commission Directive 92/76/EEC of 6 October 1992 recognising                     of the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 December
protected zones exposed to particular plant health risks in the                  1991 in Case T-6/89 Enichem Anic v Commission;
Community came to an end by application of Commission Directi-
ve 95/40/EC of 19 July 1995 and Commission Directive 96/15/EC
of 14 March 1996.                                                            2. Dismisses Anic’s action against Commission Deci-
                                                                                 sion 86/398/EEC of 23 April 1986 relating to a proceeding
                                                                                 under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty (IV/31.149 — Polypropy-
Those directives preclude the application of national legislation which          lene), except to the extent that results from point 1, first indent,
keeps such a ban in force beyond that date.                                      of the operative part of that judgment;
(1) OJ C 72 of 7.3.1998.                                                     3. Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Anic Partecipazioni SpA,
                                                                                 formerly Anic SpA, then Enichem Anic SpA, in Article 3 of
                                                                                 Decision 86/398/EEC at the sum of ITL 662 215 500;
 ---pagebreak--- C 333/4                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                        20.11.1999
4. Dismisses the cross-appeal by Anic Partecipazioni SpA, formerly        2. Orders Hercules Chemicals NV to pay the costs.
    Anic SpA, then Enichem Anic SpA;
                                                                          (1) OJ C 77 of 28.3.1992.
5. Orders each party to bear its own costs relating to the proceedings
    before the Court of First Instance;
6. Orders Anic Partecipazioni SpA, formerly Anic SpA, then
    Enichem Anic SpA, to pay the costs relating to these proceedings.
                                                                                           JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(1) OJ C 77 of 28.3.1992.                                                                          (Sixth Chamber)
                                                                                                     of 8 July 1999
                                                                          in Case C-199/92 P: Hüls AG v Commission of the
                                                                                             European Communities (1)
                                                                          (Appeal — Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance
                                                                          — Reopening of the oral procedure — Commission’s Rules
                                                                          of Procedure — Procedure for the adoption of a decision by
                JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                     the College of Members of the Commission — Competition
                                                                          rules applicable to undertakings — Concepts of agreement
                                                                          and concerted practice — Principles and rules applicable to
                         (Sixth Chamber)                                           evidence — Presumption of innocence — Fine)
                           of 8 July 1999                                                           (1999/C 333/07)
in Case C-51/92 P: Hercules Chemicals NV v Commission                                        (Language of the case: German)
               of the European Communities (1)
                                                                          (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
(Appeal — Procedure — Obligation to deliver judgments in                                     in the European Court Reports)
cases concerning the same decision at the same time — Rules
of Procedure of the Commission — Procedure for the
                                                                          In Case C-199/92 P: Hüls AG, whose registered office is in Marl,
adoption of a decision by the College of Members of the                   Germany, represented by H.-J. Herrmann and subsequently by
Commission — Competition rules applicable to undertakings                 F. Montag, Rechtsanwälte, Cologne, with an address for service
    — Rights of the defence — Access to the file — Fine)                  in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Messrs Loesch & Wolter, 8
                                                                          Rue Zithe, supported by DSM NV, whose registered office is in
                         (1999/C 333/06)                                  Heerlen, Netherlands, represented by I.G.F. Cath, of The Hague
                                                                          Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the
                                                                          Chambers of L. Dupong, 14a Rue des Bains, appeal against the
                                                                          judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) of
                   (Language of the case: English)                        10 March 1992 in Case T-9/89 Hüls v Commission [1992]
                                                                          ECR II-499, seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other
                                                                          party to the proceedings being the Commission of the
In Case C-51/92 P: Hercules Chemicals NV, whose registered                European Communities (Agents: G. zur Hausen and B. Jansen)
office is at Beringen, Belgium, represented by M. Siragusa, of            the Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: P.J.G. Kapteyn,
the Rome Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at
                                                                          President of the Chamber, G. Hirsch, G.F. Mancini (Rapporte-
the Chambers of Messrs Elvinger & Hoss, 15 Côte d’Eich,
                                                                          ur), J.L. Murray and H. Ragnemalm, Judges; G. Cosmas, Advo-
appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
                                                                          cate General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, and D. Louter-
the European Communities (First Chamber) of 17 December                   man-Hubeau, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has
1991 in Case T-7/89 Hercules v Commission[1991] ECR II-                   given a judgment on 8 July 1999, in which it:
1711, seeking to have that judgment set aside, the other party
to the proceedings being the Commission of the European                   1. Dismisses the appeal;
Communities (Agent: K. Banks) — the Court (Sixth Chamber),
composed of: P.J.G. Kapteyn, President of the Chamber,                    2. Orders Hüls AG to pay the costs;
G. Hirsch, G.F. Mancini (Rapporteur), J.L. Murray and H. Rag-
nemalm, Judges; G. Cosmas, Advocate General; H. von Hol-                  3. Orders DSM NV to pay its own costs.
stein, Deputy Registrar, and D. Louterman-Hubeau, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
8 July 1999, in which it:                                                 (1) OJ C 167 of 4.7.1992.
1. Dismisses the appeal;