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
(Case T-814/17) (*)
(Competition - Abuse of a dominant position - Rail freight market - Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU - Access by third-party undertakings to infrastructure managed by Lithuania’s national railway company - Removal of a section of railway track - Concept of ‘abuse’ - Actual or likely exclusion of a competitor - Calculation of the amount of the fine - 2006 Guidelines on the method for setting fines - Remedies - Proportionality - Unlimited jurisdiction)
(2021/C 9/18)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Lietuvos geležinkeliai AB (Vilnius, Lithuania) (represented by: W. Deselaers, K. Apel and P. Kirst, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Cleenewerck de Crayencour, A. Dawes, H. Leupold and G. Meessen, acting as Agents)
Intervener, in support of the defendant: Orlen Lietuva AB (Mažeikiai, Lithuania) (represented by: C. Thomas and C. Conte, lawyers)
Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking, primarily, the annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 6544 final of 2 October 2017 relating to proceedings under Article 102 TFEU (Case AT.39813 — Baltic Rail) and, in the alternative, the reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.
The Court:
1.Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Lietuvos geležinkeliai AB by Article 2 of European Commission Decision C(2017) 6544 final of 2 October 2017 relating to proceedings under Article 102 TFEU (Case AT.39813 — Baltic Rail) at EUR 20 068 650;
2.Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3.Orders Lietuvos geležinkeliai and the Commission to bear their own costs;
4.Orders Orlen Lietuva AB to bear its own costs.
(*) Language of the case: English.
OJ C 52, 12.2.2018.