Brussels, 17/05/2013 (Agence Europe) - In a ruling issued on 17 May in combined cases T-147/09, T-148/09 and T-154/09, the European Union General Court reduced the fine imposed by the European Commission in January 2009 on Italian/US company Parker ITR for its involvement, along with other companies, in price-fixing in the marine hoses market from April 1986 to May 2007 (see EUROPE 9828) from €25.61 million to €6.4 million, inasmuch as the Commission could not find the company liable for the whole duration of the infringement.
The total fines on eleven companies involved in price-fixing, the carving up of markets and the sharing of sensitive business information came to €131 million. The Commission imposed a fine of €24.50 million on Trelleborg Industrie, for €12.20 million of which Trelleborg was jointly and severally liable. The fine imposed on Parker ITR amounted to €26.61 million, for €8.32 million of which Parker-Hannifin was jointly and severally liable. A fine of €4.90 million was imposed on Manuli Rubber Industries SpA (MRI). The five companies appealed to the General Court for annulment of the Commission's decision or at least a reduction in the fines.
In the General Court's ruling on Friday, it says that for Parker ITR and Parker-Hannifin (CaseT-147/09), the Commission has not shown that there was a structural link between Parker ITR and the entity which preceded it (ITR-Rubber) and actually took part in the cartel. Secondly, the Court holds that it has not been proved that the transfer of Parker ITR was an abuse. Consequently, in accordance with the principle of personal liability, the Court annuls the Commission's Decision insofar as it found that the company had participated in the infringement in respect of the period before 1 January 2002. The Court reduces the fine from €25.61 million to €6.40 million, for €6.30 million of which Parker-Hannifin must be held jointly and severally liable. For Trelleborg Industrie and Trelleborg AB (a Franco-Swedish company, CaseT-148/09), the Court holds that the Commission erred in law in categorising their infringement as continuous despite not having any proof that the companies participated in the cartel during the intermediate period from May 1997 to June 1999. However, although the infringement committed by the companies cannot be categorised as continuing, the fact remains that it is a repeated infringement and the Commission did not impose any fines for the intermediate period, therefore the fine remains in place. For MRI (Case T-154/09), the Court partially annuls the contested decision inasmuch as the Commission did not follow its own leniency guidelines, under which the rate of reduction of the fine should have been 40% instead of the 30% applied by the Commission to take account of the company's readiness to cooperate and the degree of added value of the evidence it provided. However, on account of the gravity of the infringement and the duration of MRI's participation, the Court holds that the amount of the fine is appropriate and that there is thus no need to reduce it. (FG/transl.fl)