The European Commission had no discretion to reimburse Deutsche Telekom AG for the part of a fine which had not been required to be paid, together with default interest, after at the end of 2018 the General Court of the European Union reduced the amount of the €31 million fine imposed in October 2014 for abuse of a dominant position on the Slovak telecommunications services market (see EUROPE 11177/2). This was the ruling of the General Court in a judgment delivered on Wednesday 19 January (Case T-610/19).
Deutsche Telekom is claiming damages because the Commission did not pay it default interest for the period between the date of payment of the €31 million fine and the date of repayment of the €12 million part of the fine found to be not due in December 2018 (T-827/14) (see EUROPE 12686/34).
The General Court partially upheld the German group’s claim. In particular, it is of the opinion that under Article 266 TFEU, which confers rights on individuals who have won their case before the European Court, the Commission was obliged to pay default interest on the part of the fine found not to be due and for the entire period in question.
This obligation is intended to compensate in a lump sum for the loss of enjoyment of a claim due to objective delay and to encourage the Commission to take particular care when adopting a decision involving the payment of a fine, the General Court points out. Furthermore, it adds, the Commission is not empowered to determine, by an individual decision, the conditions under which it will pay default interest in the event of a reduction of part of a fine it has imposed.
In this respect, the General Court finds a direct link between the Commission’s infringement of Article 266 and the damage consisting in the loss of default interest on the part of the fine which had not been required to be paid. It therefore awarded Deutsche Telekom €1.75 million in accordance with the applicable financial regulations.
On the other hand, Deutsche Telekom’s claim for compensation for the alleged loss of profit suffered as a result of the loss of use of the part of the fine which had not been required to be paid was rejected. The German group has not shown that it would necessarily have invested the sum in question in its activities or that it had to give up concrete projects because it did not have the sum.
See the General Court’s judgment (in French): https://bit.ly/3fBAvT1 (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)