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 C-494/11 P)
(Appeals - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for the installation and maintenance of elevators and escalators - Fines - Parent company and subsidiaries - Imputability of the unlawful conduct)
2012/C 366/36
Language of the case: English
Appellants: Otis Luxembourg Sàrl, formerly General Technic-Otis Sàrl, Otis SA, Otis GmbH & Co. OHG, Otis BV, Otis Elevator (represented by: A. Winckler and D. Gerard, lawyers, and by J. Temple Lang and C. Cook, Solicitors)
Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet, R. Sauer and J. Bourke, Agents)
Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 July 2011 in Joined Cases T-141/07, T-142/07, T-145/07 and T-146/07 General Technic-Otis and Others v Commission, by which the General Court dismissed an action for the partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 512 final of 21 February 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/E 1/38.823 — Elevators and Escalators), concerning a cartel in the market for the installation and maintenance of elevators and escalators in Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, concerning bid-rigging, market-sharing, price-fixing, the awarding of projects and contracts related thereto and exchange of information, and, in the alternative, for the annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant — Liability of a parent company for infringements of the competition rules committed by its subsidiaries
1.The appeal is dismissed.
2.Otis Luxembourg Sàrl, Otis SA, Otis GmbH & Co. OHG, Otis BV and Otis Elevator Company shall pay the costs.
(1)
OJ C 347, 26.11.2011.