Action brought on 8 March 2006 - General Química and Others v Commission of the European Communities
(Case T-85/06)
Language of the case: Spanish
Parties
Applicants: General Química S.A. (Lantarón, Álava, Spain), Repsol Química S.A. and Repsol YPF S.A. (Madrid) (represented by: J.M. Jiménez Laiglesia and J. Jiménez Laiglesia, lawyers)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Form of order sought
Annul Articles 1(g), 1(h) and 2(d) of the decision in so far as it declares Repson Química and Repsol YPF to be jointly and severally liable for an infringement of Article 81(1) EC;
alternatively, annul the declaration of joint and several liability in respect of Repsol YPF;
annul Article 2(d) of the decision in so far as it fixes the amount of the fine at EUR 3.38 million;
alternatively, reduce the amount of the fine in an appropriate manner;
order the European Commission to pay the costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
The action is brought against Commission Decision C(2005) 5592 final of 21 December 2005 in Case COMP/F/38.443 - Chemicals for the rubber industry. In the contested decision the Commission declared that the applicant, among other undertakings, had infringed Article 81(1) EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement by participating, between 1999-2000, in a cartel and concerted practices consisting in price-fixing and the exchange of confidential information in the rubber chemicals sector in the EEA. In respect of those infringements the Commission imposed a fine jointly and severally on the applicants.
In support of their claims the applicants rely on the following grounds:
incorrect assessment by the Commission, in declaring Repsol YPF and Repsol Química jointly liable with General Química and, alternatively, incorrect assessment and failure to state reasons for the declaration of joint and several liability in respect of Repsol YPF;
incorrect assessment, failure to state reasons and infringement of the principles of proportionality and equal treatment in the calculation of the fine;
incorrect assessment and defective reasoning in the application of the Commission notice on immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases.
1