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
(Joined Cases C-239/11 P, C-489/11 P and C-498/11 P) (<span class="super">1</span>)
(Appeals - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market in gas insulated switchgear projects - Market sharing - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Proof of the infringement - Single and continuous infringement - Distortion of the evidence - Probative value of statements which run counter to the interests of the declarant - Fines - Starting amount - Reference year - Deterrent multiplier - Powers of unlimited jurisdiction - Equal treatment - Rights of the defence - Duty to state reasons)
2014/C 52/06
Language of the case: German
Appellants: Siemens AG (represented by: I. Brinker, C. Steinle and M. Hörster, Rechtsanwälte (C-239/11 P)), Mitsubishi Electric Corp. (represented by: R. Denton, Solicitor, and K. Haegeman, advocaat (C-489/11 P)), Toshiba Corp. (represented by: J. MacLennan, Solicitor, A. Dawes, Solicitor, A. Schulz, Rechtsanwalt, and S. Sakellariou, dikigoros (C 498/11 P))
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Antoniadis, R. Sauer, N. Khan and P. Van Nuffel, acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the defendant: EFTA Surveillance Authority (represented by: M. Schneider and M. Moustakali, acting as Agents)
Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 3 March 2011 in Case T-110/07 Siemens v Commission, by which the General Court dismissed the appellant’s action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 6762 final of 24 January 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement concerning a cartel in the market in gas insulated switchgear projects or, in the alternative, for a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the appellant — Infringement of the right to a fair hearing, the rights of the defence, the principle of equal treatment and the duty to state reasons — Distortion of the evidence — Erroneous application of the rules on limitation of actions — Infringement of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
The Court:
1.Dismisses the appeals;
2.Orders Siemens AG, Mitsubishi Electric Corp. and Toshiba Corp. to pay the costs.
* * *
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 232, 6.8.2011.
OJ C 347, 26.11.2011.