Language of document :

Judgment of the General Court of 29 April 2015 — Total and Elf Aquitaine v Commission

(Case T-470/11) 1

(Competition — Market for methacrylates — Fines — Joint and several liability of parent companies and their subsidiary for the infringing conduct of the latter — Full and immediate payment of the fine by the subsidiary — Reduction of the fine imposed on the subsidiary following a judgment of the General Court — Letters from the Commission demanding payment from the parent companies of the amount reimbursed by it to the subsidiary, plus late-payment interest — Actions for annulment — Challengeable act — Admissibility — Interest on late payment)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Total SA (Courbevoie, France) and Elf Aquitaine SA (Courbevoie) (represented initially by A. Noël-Baron and É. Morgan de Rivery, and subsequently by É. Morgan de Rivery and E. Lagathu, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin and V. Bottka, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s letters BUDG/DGA/C4/BM/s746396 of 24 June 2011 and BUDG/DGA/C4/BM/s812886 of 8 July 2011 or, in the alternative, reduction of the amounts claimed or, in the further alternative, annulment the late-payment interest imposed on Elf Aquitaine, in the amount of EUR 31 312 114.58, for which Total is jointly liable up to the amount of EUR 19 191 296.03.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Annuls the Commission’s letters BUDG/DGA/C4/BM/s746396 of 24 June 2011 and BUDG/DGA/C4/BM/s812886 of 8 July 2011 in so far as, in those letters, the European Commission imposed on Elf Aquitaine SA late-payment interest in the amount of EUR 31 312 114.58, for which Total SA is jointly liable up to the amount of EUR 19 191 296.03;

Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

Orders the Commission to pay two fifths of the costs of Total and Elf Aquitaine and to bear three fifths of its own costs. Total and Elf Aquitaine are ordered to bear three fifths of their own costs and to pay two fifths of the costs of the Commission.

____________

____________

1 OJ C 319, 29.10.2011.