Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/26

—

(Case C-381/22 P)

(2022/C 303/33)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Japan Airlines Co. Ltd (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, avocat, K. Van Hove, advocaat, and R Burton, Solicitor)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

—set aside the judgment under appeal insofar as it holds that Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA apply to inbound airfreight services on EEA-third country routes;

—annul the Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 — Airfreight) (the Decision) in its entirety or, in the alternative, annul the Decision insofar as it finds that Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement apply to inbound airfreight services on EEA-third country routes and reduce the fine imposed on the appellant to EUR 26 775 000 or to such other amount as the Court sees fit;

—order the Commission to bear all of the costs of these proceedings, including those before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In its appeal, the appellant relies on the following pleas.

The General Court erred in law by refusing to address the appellant’s plea that the Decision infringed Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement by prohibiting conduct with respect to inbound airfreight services that do not restrict competition within the EEA and wrongly relying instead on the public international law concept of qualified effects to establish the Commission’s jurisdiction under EU law; and

In the alternative, the General Court erred in law in its application of the qualified effects test in finding that the Commission had jurisdiction to apply Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement in relation to inbound airfreight services on EEA-third country routes.

—