Language of document :

Judgment of the General Court of 15 July 2015 — voestalpine and voestalpine Wire Rod Austria v Commission

(Case T-418/10) 1

(Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European prestressing steel market — Price fixing, market sharing and exchanging of sensitive commercial information — Single, complex and continuous infringement — Agency contract — Imputability of the unlawful conduct of the agent to the principal — Lack of knowledge of the agent’s unlawful conduct by the principal — Participation in an aspect of the infringement and awareness of the overall plan — 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Proportionality — Principle that penalties must fit the offence — Unlimited jurisdiction)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: voestalpine AG (Linz, Austria); and voestalpine Wire Rod Austria GmbH, formerly voestalpine Austria Draht GmbH (Sankt Peter-Freienstein, Austria) (represented by: A. Ablasser-Neuhuber, G. Fussenegger, U. Denzel and M. Mayer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Sauer, V. Bottka, C. Hödlmayr, Agents, and R. Van der Hout, 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 Article 2(5) 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;

Reduces the fine imposed jointly and severally on voestalpine AG and voestalpine Wire Rod Austria GmbH from EUR 22 million to EUR 7.5 million;

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay two thirds of the costs of voestalpine and voestalpine Wire Rod Austria;

Orders Voestalpine and voestalpine Wire Rod Austria to bear one third of their own costs.

____________

1 OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.