Language of document :

Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2015 — Fapricela v Commission

(Case T-398/10) 1

(Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European prestressing steel market — Price fixing, market sharing and exchanging of sensitive commercial information — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Cooperation during the administrative procedure)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Fapricela — Indústria de Trefilaria, SA (Ançã, Portugal) (represented initially by M. Gorjão-Henriques and S. Roux, lawyers, and subsequently by T. Guerreiro, R. Lopes and S. Alberto, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, P. Costa de Oliveira and V. Bottka, Agents, and M. Marques Mendes, lawyer)

Re:

Application for annulment and alteration of Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (case COMP/38344 — Prestressing Steel), amended by Commission Decision C(2010) 6676 final of 30 September 2010, and by Commission Decision C(2011) 2269 final of 4 April 2011.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

Annuls Commission Decision C(2010) 4387 final of 30 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (case COMP/38344 — Prestressing Steel), amended by Commission Decision C(2010) 6676 final of 30 September 2010, and by Commission Decision C(2011) 2269 final of 4 April 2011 in so far as it finds that Fapricela — Indústria de Trefilaria, SA infringed Article 101(1) TFEU not only by participating in an infringement of that provision in the Iberian market but also by participating in a cartel covering the internal market and subsequently within the European Economic Area (EEA), and imposed on it a fine of EUR 8 874 000;

Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Fapricela — Indústria de Trefilaria at EUR 8 874 000;

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

____________

1 OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.