EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-379/06: Action brought on 14 December 2006 — Kaimer and Others v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62006TN0379

62006TN0379

December 14, 2006
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

24.2.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 42/29

(Case T-379/06)

(2007/C 42/50)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicants: Kaimer GmbH & Co. Holding (Essen, Germany), SANHA GmbH & Co. KG (Essen, Germany) and Sanha Italia srl. (Milan, Italy) (represented by: J. Brück, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Annul the defendant's decision C(2006) 4180 final of 20 September 2006, as amended by the defendant's decision of 29 September 2006, served on applicants 1 to 3 on 5 October 2006, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/F-1/38.121 — Fittings);

in the alternative, reduce the duration of the alleged infringement by applicants 1 to 3 in Article 1 of the decision and cancel or reduce the fine imposed on applicants 1 to 3 in Article 3 of the decision;

order the defendant to pay costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants are challenging Commission Decision C(2006) 4180 final of 20 September 2006 in Case COMP/F-1/38.121 — Fittings. In the contested decision a fine was imposed on the applicant for breach of Article 81(1) EC and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement. According to the Commission, the applicants took part in a series of agreements in the form of price-fixing, establishing price lists and rebates, establishing mechanisms for the implementation of price increases, dividing up markets and customers and exchanging other economic information on the market for copper fittings and copper alloy fittings.

The applicants put forward five pleas in support of their claims.

First of all, it is submitted, in particular, that the defendant based its reasoning on documents, in respect of which the applicants were not granted a fair hearing.

Secondly, the applicants submit that the Commission infringed the duty to state reasons under Article 253 EC. According to the applicants the contested decision is not adequately reasoned on the ground that the facts at issue were not properly assessed. In addition, exculpatory facts were not taken into account and evidence was incorrectly evaluated.

Furthermore, the applicants criticise the fact that the facts, as established by the Commission, were deemed to be a complex infringement contrary to Article 81(1) EC.

Fourthly, it is submitted, in the alternative, that the calculation of the fine reveals a misuse of powers in that it was based on an excessive duration of the infringement and that the applicants did not benefit from mitigating circumstances.

Finally, the applicants maintain that the Commission infringed the principle of proportionality with the amount of the fine imposed.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia