Luxembourg, 08/02/2007 (Agence Europe) - The Danone company (Danone) was found guilty by the European Commission in 2000 of the involvement of its subsidiary Alken-Maes in a cartel on the Belgian beer market. The fine levied on Danone has been kept at the level decided by the European Court of First Instance (see EUROPE 8107 and 9058) because the European Court of Justice has rejected Danone's appeal for a further reduction in the fine (the Court of First Instance reduced it by more than €44 million to €42.41 million, Case C-3/06 P, ruling issued on 8 February).
The ruling fully supports the line taken by the Advocate General in his conclusions, fully rejecting Danone's case against the previous Court of First Instance ruling (see EUROPE 9311).
One of the arguments made by Danone was that the European Commission's decision to take into account the fact that the company had committed the same crime more than once had no basis in EU law. The Court agreed with the Advocate General that the decision came within the Commission's power of judgement when deciding on fines.
The ruling is an important precedent in EU competition law. At a press conference, Jonathan Todd, spokesperson for EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes, welcomed it: “This ruling is important because it is the first time that the Court of Justice has clearly confirmed the Commission's policy of increasing fines for repeat offenders. The clear message is, if you're a company that has previously been condemned for participating in a cartel, and you are still doing so, get in touch with DG Competition immediately to blow the whistle - otherwise you are going to pay a heavy fine.”
On the other questions of law, the Court's rulings explains that the Court of First Instance did not infringe Danone's right to be heard (as Danone has claimed) because during the first appeal the Court of First Instance did not base its ruling on any argument which Danone would have been able to foresee being taken into account.
Danone has now exhausted all appeal options and must now pay the fine to the European Commission and the legal costs for its appeals. At the time we went to press, Danone had not responded to our request for information. (cd)