- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Rectification order of 4 May 2020.#Nexans France and Nexans v European Commission.#Rectification.#Case T-449/14.
ECLI:EU:T:2020:174
62014TO0449(01)
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
ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Eighth Chamber)
4 May 2020 (*1)
(Rectification)
In Case T‑449/14,
Nexans France SAS, established in Courbevoie (France),
Nexans SA, established in Courbevoie,
represented by G. Forwood, lawyer, M. Powell, A. Rogers and A. Oh, Solicitors,
applicants,
European Commission, represented by C. Giolito and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents, and by B. Doherty, Barrister,
defendant,
APPLICATION under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicants and, in the alternative, a reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants,
THE GENERAL COURT (Eighth Chamber),
composed of A. M. Collins, President, M. Kancheva (Rapporteur) and R. Barents, Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the following
1The Court delivered a judgment of 12 July 2018, Nexans France and Nexans v Commission (T‑449/14, EU:T:2018:456).
2In accordance with Article 164(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, the parties having been given an opportunity to submit their written observations pursuant to Article 164(3) of those rules, it is necessary to rectify, in the version in the language of the case, a clerical mistake found in paragraph 156 of that judgment.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (Eighth Chamber)
hereby orders:
In paragraph 156 of the judgment, in the version in the language of the case, it must be read ‘It is sufficient that, as in the present case, the proportion of the value of sales to be taken into consideration is justified by other factors capable of influencing the determination of gravity pursuant to that provision […]’ instead of ‘It is sufficient that the proportion of the value of sales to be taken into consideration is justified by other factors capable of influencing the determination of gravity pursuant to that provision […]’.
Luxembourg, 4 May 2020.
Registrar
President
(*1) Language of the case: English.