Sunteți pe pagina 1din 2

C 301/22 EN Official Journal of the European Union 6.11.

2010

Operative part of the judgment parent companies’ joint and several liability is to be established
for payment of the fine imposed on Trioplast Wittenheim SA;
The Court:

3. Dismisses the remainder of the action;


1. dismisses the action;

4. Orders Trioplast Industrier to bear half of its own costs and to pay
2. orders Trioplast Witteheim SA to pay the costs.
half of the costs incurred by the Commission;

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006. 5. Orders the Commission to bear half of its own costs and to pay
half of the costs incurred by Trioplast Industrier.

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2010 —


Trioplast Industrier v Commission (1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.
(Case T-40/06) (1)

(Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2010 —
— Market for industrial plastic sacks — Decision finding an TF1 v European Commission
infringement of Article 81 EC — Duration of the
infringement — Fines — Seriousness of the infringement (Case T-193/06) (1)
— Mitigating circumstances — Cooperation during the
administrative procedure — Proportionality — Joint and (State aid — Aid schemes for cinematographic and audio­
several liability — Principal of legal certainty) visual production — Decision not to raise objections —
Actions for annulment — Absence of any significant effect
(2010/C 301/33) on the competitive position — Inadmissibility)

Language of the case: Swedish (2010/C 301/34)

Language of the case: French


Parties
Applicant: Trioplast Industrier AB (Smålandsstenar, Sweden) Parties
(represented by: T. Pettersson and O. Larsson, lawyers)
Applicant: Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) (Boulogne-Billancourt,
France) (represented by: J. P. Hordies and C. Smits, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de
la Torre, P. Hellström and V. Bottka, subsequently F. Castillo de
la Torre, L. Parpala and V. Bottka, acting as Agents) Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Giolito, T.
Scharf and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Re:
Intervener in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented
Application for partial annulment of Commission Decision by: G. de Bergues and L. Butel, acting as Agents)
C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to a
procedure under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (Case
COMP/F/38.354 — Industrial sacks) concerning an agreement Re:
in the market for industrial plastic sacks and, in the alternative,
an application for reduction of the fine imposed on the APPLICATION for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006)
applicant. 832 Final of 22 March 2006 relating to support measures for
the cinema and audiovisual industry in France (State aid
NN 84/2004 and N 95/2004 — France, Aid schemes for the
Operative part of the judgment film and audiovisual industry)

The Court:
Operative part of the judgment
1. Annuls the first paragraph of Article 2(f) of Commission Decision The Court:
C(2005) 4634 of 30 November 2005 relating to a procedure
under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/F/38.354 —
Industrial sacks) in so far as it relates to Trioplast Industrier AB; 1. Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

2. Fixes at EUR 2.73 million the amount ascribed to Trioplast 2. Orders Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) to bear its own costs and
Industrier, on the basis of which its share of the successive to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission;
6.11.2010 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 301/23

3. Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs. 2. Orders Whirlpool Europe Srl to bear its own costs and to pay
those incurred by the Council of the European Union and LG
Electronics, Inc.;

(1) OJ C 224, 16.9.2006.


3. Orders the Italian Republic, the European Commission and the
European Committee of Domestic Equipment Manufacturers
Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2010 — (CECED) to bear their own costs.
Whirlpool Europe v Council

(Case T-314/06) (1)


(1) OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.
(Dumping — Imports of certain combined refrigerator-
freezers originating in South Korea — Definition of the
product concerned — Rights of the defence — Advisory
Committee — Duty to state reasons — Choice of the
Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2010 —
method used to define the product concerned — Article
Mohr & Sohn v Commission
15(2) and Article 20(5) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96
(now Article 15(2) and Article 20(5) of Regulation (EC) (Case T-131/07) (1)
No 1225/2009))
(Inland waterway transport — Community-fleet capacity —
(2010/C 301/35) Conditions for putting new vessels into service (‘old for new’
rule) — Commission decision not to grant the specialised
Language of the case: English
vessels exemption — Article 4(6) of Regulation (EC)
No 718/1999)

Parties (2010/C 301/36)


Applicant: Whirlpool Europe Srl (Comerio, Italy) (represented by: Language of the case: German
M. Bronckers and F. Louis, lawyers)

Parties
Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P.
Hix, Agent, and G. Berrisch, lawyer) Applicant: Paul Mohr & Sohn, Baggerei und Schiffahrt (Nieder­
walluf, Germany) (represented by: F. von Waldstein, lawyer)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Italian Republic (represented


by: G. Albenzio, lawyer), and European Committee of Domestic Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun and
Equipment Manufacturers (CECED), (Brussels, Belgium) (repre­ K. Simonsson, Agents)
sented by: Y. Desmedt and A. Verheyden, lawyers)

Re:
Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission
(represented by: H. van Vliet and T. Scharf, Agents) and LG Application for annulment of Commission Decision SG (2007)
Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, South Korea) (represented initially by: D/200972 of 28 February 2007 not to grant to the vessel
L. Ruessmann and P. Hecker, and subsequently by L. ‘Niclas’ the specialised vessels exemption, pursuant to Article
Ruessmann and A. Willems, lawyers) 4(6) of Council Regulation (EC) No 718/1999 of 29 March
1999 on a Community-fleet capacity policy to promote
inland waterway transport (OJ 1999 L 90, p. 1)

Re:
Application for the annulment in part of Council Regulation Operative part of the judgment
(EC) No 1289/2006 of 25 August 2006 imposing a definitive
anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional 1. The application is dismissed;
duty imposed on imports of certain side-by-side refrigerators
originating in the Republic of Korea (OJ 2006 L 236, p. 11)
2. Paul Mohr & Sohn, Baggerei und Schiffahrt is ordered to bear its
own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:

(1) OJ C 155, 7.7.2007.

1. Dismisses the action;