- 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
Case C-451/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 12 August 2013 — Gigaset AG v SKW Stahl-Metallurgie GmbH, SKW Stahl-Metallurgie Holding AG
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013CN0451
62013CN0451
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
23.11.2013
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 344/41
(Case C-451/13)
2013/C 344/71
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Gigaset AG
Defendants: SKW Stahl-Metallurgie GmbH, SKW Stahl-Metallurgie Holding AG
Questions referred
1.In a decision by which it imposes a fine on several natural or legal persons as joint and several debtors for a breach of Article 101 TFEU, is the Commission also obliged to give a conclusive ruling on the question as to what shares of the fine should be apportioned to the individual joint and several debtors?
(a)Is a Commission decision which contains no express instruction as to apportionment among joint and several debtors to be interpreted as meaning that the fine is to be paid in equal shares by all of the joint and several debtors?
(b)If Question 2(a) is answered in the negative: Can the courts of the Member States close the gap in the decision that ensues if the Commission does not rule on the apportionment of the fine among joint and several debtors, without any need for a supplementary decision by the Commission?
3.If Question 1 is answered in the negative or Question 2(b) in the affirmative: Does European Union law contain provisions as to how a fine should be apportioned among joint and several debtors?
4.If Question 1 or Question 3 is answered in the affirmative: Can a joint and several debtor which has paid the fine in full or in part seek settlement by the other joint and several debtors before a final decision has been taken on an action brought challenging the fixing of the fine?