Action brought on 5 October 2009 - Grúas Abril Asistencia v Commission

(Case T-386/09)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Grúas Abril Asistencia SL (Alicante, Spain) (represented by: R. L. García García, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Declare that the dismissal by the Spanish competition authorities and courts of the claim of the applicant, GRUAS ABRIL ASISTENCIA SL, is contrary to Articles 81 and 82 EC.

In consequence, order the Commission of the European Communities, which adopted the contested approval, to provide the necessary measures and guarantees in order to bring such unlawful activity to an end, imposing the appropriate fines and penalties for such infringement, and entitle BAS HERMANOS SL to be compensated for the loss it suffered as a result of that infringement.

Declare, in short, that by its conduct towards its service provider, the applicant, the company MAPFRE MUTUALIDAD DE SEGUROS Y REASEGUROS A PRIMA FIJA (now known as MAPFRE SA), infringed the Spanish Law on the Protection of Competition and Articles 81 and 82 EC, by unilaterally setting the rates for the breakdown services provided, setting rates below the cost price of such services, unjustifiably and arbitrarily requiring the services to be performed subject to conditions not provided for under the contract (performance of the service using breakdown trucks displaying MAPFRE's logo), threatening to terminate the contract if such requirements were not met, and ultimately carrying out such a threat.

Order the Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in the present proceedings is a family company that provides vehicle-towing services for breakdown assistance.

In its action, the applicant opposes MAPFRE SA's conduct, allegedly in breach of the competition rules, which, in a contractual relationship for the provision of breakdown services, when required by MAPFRE or its insureds, for vehicles insured by MAPFRE, required the breakdown service to be provided, as the applicant itself states, using vehicles displaying the MAPFRE logo and the MAPFRE trade mark to be advertised completely free of charge, with rates set below the actual cost of the service provided.

In support of its action, the applicant alleges infringement of the Community and national rules on competition.

____________