Brussels, 20/05/2015 (Agence Europe) - With its decision on Wednesday 20 May to uphold the fine of nearly €60 million imposed by the European Commission on the Roullier group, the General Court also took position - for the first time - on the relationship between the standard procedure and the settlement procedure, concluding that the Commission was not bound by the scale of fines laid down in the framework of the standard procedure.
In July 2010, the Commission ordered the producers of phosphates for animal feed to pay fines of a total of €175,647,000 for having taken part in an illegal cartel for more than 30 years (see EUROPE 10185). One of these producers, the Roullier group, refused to enter into a settlement (the proposed fine at that point was in the €41 to €44 million range, or a 10% reduction for admitting its involvement in the cartel), and ended up being fined nearly €60 million under the standard procedure.
The Roullier group then brought an appeal to the General Court of the EU (T-456/10) to overturn the Commission's decision and reduce the fine. The group challenged the fact that a higher fine was being imposed than the maximum of the range under consideration during the settlement negotiations. This is the first case dealing with a so-called “hybrid” merger case, as it involves both a standard procedure and a settlement procedure.
The General Court rejected the group's appeal. First of all, it found that the Commission had used the same method to calculate the range of fines during the settlement procedure stage and the level of the fine ultimately imposed in the standard procedure. The difference between the two amounts is based on the potential reductions in the framework of the settlement procedure and the application of penalties (on the grounds of new information) in the standard one. The Commission did not, therefore, increase the final fine as punishment for the group's having refused a settlement, the General Court found.
Secondly, the Commission is not in any case bound by the range communicated in the settlement procedure, according to the European judges. It would be “illogical” to make such a link, they stressed, because the two procedures are separate and pursue different objectives. A range of fines is only proposed in the settlement procedure, whilst the standard procedure aims to determine the liabilities of the companies concerned and allows any new evidence, which may increase the final fine, to be taken into account. (Jan Kordys)