Notice for the OJ

 

Action brought on 2 September 2002 by Bank Austria Creditanstalt AG against the Commission of the European Communities

    (Case T-260/02)

    Language of the Case: German

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 2 September 2002 by Bank Austria Creditanstalt AG, established in Vienna, represented by C. Zschocke and J. Beninca, Lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

(annul the Commission decision of 11 June 2002 (COMP/36.571 ( Austrian Banks) in so far as it relates to the applicant;

(in the alternative, reduce the fine of EUR 30 380 000 imposed on the applicant in the defendant's decision;

(order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The proceeding conducted by the defendant was directed against regular meetings of banks in Austria ("Bankenrunden"). By the contested decision the Commission found that the applicant ( together with seven other Austrian banking institutions ( had infringed Article 81 EC by participating in agreements and concerted practices concerning prices, charges and advertising measures, designed to restrict competition on the Austrian banking market from 1 January 1995 until 24 June 1998. The Commission imposed fines on the banks concerned.

The applicant submits first of all that Article 81 EC cannot be applicable since the banks' meetings, which the applicant admits, could not affect trade between Member States because of their regional and local focus.

The applicant further contends that the defendant, when setting the basic amount, assumed that those meetings had adverse economic effects although the applicant, together with the other banks concerned, had proved by means of an economist's expert report that there were no such effects. In addition, the defendant exercised its discretion improperly when setting the basic amount because it failed to take account of the transitional situation pertaining in legal terms in Austria after entry into the European Economic Area, the statutorily privileged status of the Bankenrunden under Austrian cartel law, the participation of State authorities and the fact that the Bankenrunden were public knowledge.

Furthermore, the applicant worked with the defendant in establishing the facts. The defendant granted no reduction for that wide-ranging cooperation and therefore exercised its discretion incorrectly and to the applicant's detriment when applying the Leniency Notice.

Finally, the applicant submits that the Commission has infringed essential procedural rights held by the applicant and that it unlawfully passed the statement of objections to the FPÖ (Austrian Freedom Party).

____________