15.2.2014

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/19

—

(Case C-618/13 P)

2014/C 45/35

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Zucchetti Rubinetteria SpA (represented by: M. Condinanzi, P. Ziotti and N. Vasile, avvocati)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

—Set aside the judgment under appeal in so far as the General Court dismissed the action in Case T-396/10 with regard to the form of order seeking cancellation or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant by Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2010) 4185 final of 23 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.092 — Bathroom Fittings and Fixtures);

—Give final judgment in the matter in accordance with Article 61 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and cancel, or at least reduce, in the exercise of its unlimited jurisdiction, the fine imposed by the abovementioned Commission decision;

—In any event, order the Commission to pay the costs both of the present proceedings and of the proceedings in Case T-396/10.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Infringement of EU law with regard to the calculation of the fines and the assessment of the gravity of the infringement, contradictions and inadequate reasoning, as well as a failure by the General Court fully to exercise its power of review. In particular, infringement of Article 23(2) and (3) of Regulation No 1/2003 (1) and of the principles of personal responsibility, proportionality and equal treatment in the application of penalties in competition-law matters.

The appellant submits that, in the judgment under appeal, the General Court found the contested decision to be contradictory and unlawful in so far as it recognised that Zucchetti Rubinetteria SpA committed a less serious infringement than the multinational firms participating in the cartel, as it did not take part therein and was unaware of the extension of the agreement to markets other than the Italian market; however, the General Court did not draw from that the appropriate conclusions for the purposes of setting the fine. The appellant argues that the application of the same multipliers and the failure to take account of mitigating circumstances — with the consequent dismissal of the action, also in respect of cancellation or reduction of the fine imposed — thus amount to an infringement of the general principles mentioned above and of the provisions of points 25 and 29 of the Guidelines on the method of setting fines and of Article 23(2) of Regulation No 1/2003.

—

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1).

—