PARALLEL TEXTS
Nell’intesa sul mercato europeo di vetro per automobili, il Tribunale riduce l’ammenda irrogata al gruppo Saint-Gobain da EUR 880 a EUR 715 milioni
Inglese tratto da:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_CJE-14-43_en.htm
Italiano tratto da:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_CJE-14-43_it.htm
Data documento: 27-03-2014
1 |
The General Court reduces the fine imposed on the Saint-Gobain group for the car glass cartel from €880 million to €715 million
|
Nell’intesa sul mercato europeo di vetro per automobili, il Tribunale riduce l’ammenda irrogata al gruppo Saint-Gobain da EUR 880 a EUR 715 milioni
|
2 |
By decision of 12 November 2008, the Commission found that a number of companies, including several subsidiaries of the Saint-Gobain group (‘Saint-Gobain’) and their parent company (‘Compagnie’) had infringed EU competition law by participating, during various periods, in a series of anti-competitive agreements and concerted practices in the car glass sector in the European Economic Area (EEA).
|
Con decisione del 12 novembre 2008, la Commissione ha dichiarato che varie imprese, fra cui più controllate del gruppo Saint-Gobain (la «Saint-Gobain») e la loro società capogruppo (la «Compagnie») avevano violato il diritto della concorrenza dell’Unione partecipando, durante vari periodi, ad un insieme di accordi e di pratiche concordate anticoncorrenziali nel settore del vetro per automobili nello Spazio economico europeo (SEE).
|
3 |
The agreement consisted in sharing deliveries of car glass between the cartel participants in order to ensure the stability of their market shares.
|
L’accordo consisteva in una ripartizione delle forniture di vetro per automobili fra i partecipanti in modo da garantire la stabilità delle quote di mercato a ciascuno di essi.
|
4 |
On account of their participation between 10 March 1998 and 11 March 2003, a fine of €880 million was imposed jointly and severally on Saint-Gobain and the Compagnie.
|
Per avervi partecipato tra il 10 marzo 1998 e l’11 marzo 2003, alla Saint-Gobain e alla Compagnie è stata irrogata congiuntamente e solidalmente un’ammenda di EUR 880 milioni.
|
5 |
Saint-Gobain and Compagnie applied to the Court for annulment of that decision.
|
La Saint-Gobain e la Compagnie hanno quindi adito il Tribunale per ottenere l’annullamento di detta decisione.
|
6 |
In their applications, Saint-Gobain and Compagnie alleged that the Commission, inter alia, had increased the amount of the fine imposed on them jointly and severally by 60 %.
|
Nei loro ricorsi la Saint-Gobain e la Compagnie addebitano alla Commissione, fra l’altro, di avere aumentato del 60% l’importo dell’ammenda loro inflitta congiuntamente e solidalmente.
|
7 |
The Commission considered Saint-Gobain to be guilty of repeated infringement, in so far as that company had already been the subject of previous Commission decisions relating to similar infringements in 1984 and 1988.
|
La Commissione, ha considerato, infatti, che la Saint-Gobain si è resa colpevole di recidiva, in quanto aveva costituito oggetto di decisioni della Commissione per violazioni simili nel 1984 e 1988 .
|
8 |
However, the Court recalls that, for the purpose of applying the aggravating circumstance of repeated infringement, it must be established that the various infringements were committed by the same undertaking.
|
Tuttavia, il Tribunale ricorda che, per poter prendere in considerazione la circostanza aggravante della recidiva, occorre che le varie infrazioni siano state commesse dalla stessa impresa.
|
9 |
As the 1988 decision concerned a different subsidiary of Compagnie to those in question in the present case and in so far as that decision was not addressed to Compagnie, the Court finds that Saint-Gobain and Compagnie cannot be held liable for an earlier infringement for which they have not been penalised by the Commission and in the establishment of which they were not given an opportunity to present their arguments with a view to disputing that they formed an economic unit with one or other company to which the earlier decision was addressed.
|
Poiché la decisione del 1988 riguardava una controllata della Compagnie diversa da quelle di cui trattasi nella fattispecie e la Compagnie non era destinataria di detta decisione, la Saint-Gobain e la Compagnie non avrebbero dovuto, secondo il Tribunale, essere considerate responsabili di una violazione precedente per la quale esse non sono state sanzionate dalla Commissione e nell’ambito dell’accertamento della quale esse non sono state in grado di presentare i loro argomenti al fine di contestare l’eventuale esistenza di un’unità economica con l’una o l’altra società destinataria della decisione precedente.
|
10 |
In that regard, the Court points out that the passage of a long period of time since the adoption of an earlier decision may make it more difficult, if not impossible, for the parent company to contest the existence of such an economic unit, and also, depending on the circumstances, the elements constituting the infringement.
|
Al riguardo, il Tribunale sottolinea che un periodo potenzialmente lungo trascorso dall’adozione di una decisione precedente è tale da rendere molto difficile e persino impossibile la contestazione da parte della società capogruppo non solo dell’esistenza di tale unità economica, ma anche, se del caso, degli elementi costitutivi dell’infrazione.
|
11 |
The General Court therefore establishes repeated infringement only in respect of the 1984 decision.
|
Il Tribunale conferma quindi la recidiva soltanto con riguardo alla decisione del 1984 .
|
12 |
Saint-Gobain and Compagnie maintain, however, that the fact that more than 10 years have elapsed between the previous findings of an infringement and the repetition of unlawful conduct precludes a finding of repeated infringement.
|
La Saint-Gobain e la Compagnie sostengono tuttavia che un lasso di tempo di oltre dieci anni trascorso fra i precedenti accertamenti di infrazione e la recidiva del comportamento lesivo non configura una situazione di recidiva.
|
13 |
In that regard, the Court recalls that the principle of proportionality requires that the time which has elapsed between the infringement in question and a previous breach of the competition rules be taken into account in assessing an undertaking’s tendency to infringe those rules.
|
Il Tribunale ricorda che il principio di proporzionalità richiede che il tempo trascorso tra l’infrazione di cui trattasi ed un precedente inadempimento delle regole di concorrenza sia preso in considerazione per valutare la propensione dell’impresa a liberarsi da tali regole.
|
14 |
The Court observes that in the present case, nearly 14 years have elapsed between the 1984 decision and the year in which the infringement penalised started (1998).
|
Il Tribunale rileva che nella fattispecie è trascorso un periodo di quasi quattordici anni tra la decisione del 1984 e l’anno durante il quale l’infrazione sanzionata è iniziata.
|
15 |
However, having regard to the identical nature of the cluster of activity concerned by the infringement and the similarity of the cartels in question, the Court finds that, notwithstanding of the period of time elapsed, the Commission was entitled to establish repeated infringement without breaching the principle of proportionality.
|
Tuttavia, tenuto conto dell’identità dei poli di attività cui si riferisce l’infrazione, nonché della somiglianza delle intese, il Tribunale considera che, nonostante tale lasso di tempo, la Commissione ha potuto constatare la recidiva senza violare il principio di proporzionalità.
|
16 |
Given that, in the contested decision, the increase by 60% in the basic amount of the fine was justified on the basis of the decisions of 1984 and 1988 and that only the decision of 1984 may be relied on for the purposes of establishing repeated infringement, the Court considers lastly that the repeated anti-competitive conduct of Saint-Gobain and Compagnie is less serious than that found by the Commission.
|
Poiché nella decisione impugnata l’aumento del 60% dell’importo di base dell’ammenda era giustificato con riguardo alle decisioni del 1984 e 1988 e solo la prima di dette decisioni può essere considerata ai fini della recidiva, il Tribunale considera infine che la ripetizione del comportamento lesivo della Saint-Gobain e della Compagnie presenta una gravità minore di quella considerata dalla Commissione.
|
17 |
The Court therefore decides to reduce the percentage increase to the fine for repeated infringement to 30%, so that the fine imposed jointly and severally on Saint-Gobain and Compagnie is now fixed at €715 million.
|
Il Tribunale decide quindi di ridurre la percentuale dell’aumento dell’ammenda per recidiva del 30%, con la conseguenza che l’ammenda irrogata congiuntamente e solidalmente alla Saint-Gobain e alla Compagnie è ormai fissata a EUR 715 milioni.
|
18 |
NOTE:
|
IMPORTANTE:
|
19 |
An appeal, limited to points of law only, may be brought before the Court of Justice against the decision of the General Court within two months of notification of the decision.
|
Contro la decisione del Tribunale, entro due mesi a decorrere dalla data della sua notifica, può essere proposta un'impugnazione, limitata alle questioni di diritto, dinanzi alla Corte.
|
20 |
NOTE:
|
IMPORTANTE:
|
21 |
An action for annulment seeks the annulment of acts of the institutions of the European Union that are contrary to European Union law.
|
Il ricorso di annullamento mira a far annullare atti delle istituzioni dell’Unione contrari al diritto dell’Unione.
|
22 |
The Member States, the European institutions and individuals may, under certain conditions, bring an action for annulment before the Court of Justice or the General Court.
|
A determinate condizioni, gli Stati membri, le istituzioni europee e i privati possono investire la Corte di giustizia o il Tribunale di un ricorso di annullamento.
|
23 |
If the action is well founded, the act is annulled.
|
Se il ricorso è fondato, l'atto viene annullato.
|
24 |
The institution concerned must fill any legal vacuum created by the annulment of the act. |
L'istituzione interessata deve rimediare all’eventuale lacuna giuridica creata dall’annullamento dell’atto. |
|
LISTEN WITH READSPEAKER
•
The General Court reduces the fine imposed on the Saint-Gobain group for
the car glass cartel from €880 million to €715 million
By decision of 12 November 2008, the Commission found that a number of
companies, including several subsidiaries of the Saint-Gobain group
(‘Saint-Gobain’) and their parent company (‘Compagnie’) had infringed EU
competition law by participating, during various periods, in a series of
anti-competitive agreements and concerted practices in the car glass sector in
the European Economic Area (EEA).
The agreement consisted in sharing deliveries of car glass between the cartel
participants in order to ensure the stability of their market shares.
On account of their participation between 10 March 1998 and 11 March 2003, a
fine of €880 million was imposed jointly and severally on Saint-Gobain and the
Compagnie.
Saint-Gobain and Compagnie applied to the Court for annulment of that
decision.
In their applications, Saint-Gobain and Compagnie alleged that the
Commission, inter alia, had increased the amount of the fine imposed on them
jointly and severally by 60 %.
The Commission considered Saint-Gobain to be guilty of repeated infringement,
in so far as that company had already been the subject of previous Commission
decisions relating to similar infringements in 1984 and 1988.
However, the Court recalls that, for the purpose of applying the aggravating
circumstance of repeated infringement, it must be established that the various
infringements were committed by the same undertaking.
As the 1988 decision concerned a different subsidiary of Compagnie to those
in question in the present case and in so far as that decision was not addressed
to Compagnie, the Court finds that Saint-Gobain and Compagnie cannot be held
liable for an earlier infringement for which they have not been penalised by the
Commission and in the establishment of which they were not given an opportunity
to present their arguments with a view to disputing that they formed an economic
unit with one or other company to which the earlier decision was addressed.
In that regard, the Court points out that the passage of a long period of
time since the adoption of an earlier decision may make it more difficult, if
not impossible, for the parent company to contest the existence of such an
economic unit, and also, depending on the circumstances, the elements
constituting the infringement.
The General Court therefore establishes repeated infringement only in respect
of the 1984 decision.
Saint-Gobain and Compagnie maintain, however, that the fact that more than 10
years have elapsed between the previous findings of an infringement and the
repetition of unlawful conduct precludes a finding of repeated infringement.
In that regard, the Court recalls that the principle of proportionality
requires that the time which has elapsed between the infringement in question
and a previous breach of the competition rules be taken into account in
assessing an undertaking’s tendency to infringe those rules.
The Court observes that in the present case, nearly 14 years have elapsed
between the 1984 decision and the year in which the infringement penalised
started (1998).
However, having regard to the identical nature of the cluster of activity
concerned by the infringement and the similarity of the cartels in question, the
Court finds that, notwithstanding of the period of time elapsed, the Commission
was entitled to establish repeated infringement without breaching the principle
of proportionality.
Given that, in the contested decision, the increase by 60% in the basic
amount of the fine was justified on the basis of the decisions of 1984 and 1988
and that only the decision of 1984 may be relied on for the purposes of
establishing repeated infringement, the Court considers lastly that the repeated
anti-competitive conduct of Saint-Gobain and Compagnie is less serious than that
found by the Commission.
The Court therefore decides to reduce the percentage increase to the fine for
repeated infringement to 30%, so that the fine imposed jointly and severally on
Saint-Gobain and Compagnie is now fixed at €715 million.
NOTE:
An appeal, limited to points of law only, may be brought before the Court of
Justice against the decision of the General Court within two months of
notification of the decision.
NOTE:
An action for annulment seeks the annulment of acts of the institutions of
the European Union that are contrary to European Union law.
The Member States, the European institutions and individuals may, under
certain conditions, bring an action for annulment before the Court of Justice or
the General Court.
If the action is well founded, the act is annulled.
The institution concerned must fill any legal vacuum created by the annulment
of the act.
|