Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 30 March 2022

Action for annulmentPleas in lawLack of competence of the institution which adopted the contested measureExamination by the EU judicature of its own motionConditionCompliance with the principle that the parties should be heard

(Art. 263 TFEU)

(see paragraphs 77, 78)

CompetitionAdministrative procedureCommission decision finding an infringementIdentification of the infringements penalisedRequirements arising from the principle of effective judicial protectionClarity and precision of the operative part of the decisionAssessmentPrecedence of the wording of the operative part over the grounds

(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Arts 8 and 11(2); Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47)

(see paragraphs 85, 86, 90-95, 357-362)

CompetitionAdministrative procedureTime-limit with regard to proceedingsSuspensionSuspensive effect attaching to pending judicial proceedingsScopeErga omnes effectNoneConsequenceDetermination by reference to the subject matter of the dispute

(Council Regulation No 1/2003, Arts 23 and 25(6))

(see paragraphs 117, 118, 124)

CompetitionAdministrative procedurePowers of the CommissionPower to adopt a decision finding an infringement after expiry of the limitation period for the imposition of penalties as defined in Regulation No 1/2003ConditionExistence of a legitimate interest in making such a finding

(Art. 101 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Arts 7 and 25)

(see paragraphs 119, 136)

Action for annulmentSubject matterDecision finding an infringement of the competition rules by several addresseesEvidence concerning addressees other than the applicant, not challenged or challenged outside the time limitNot includedConsequenceAccount taken only of the aspects of the operative part of the decision concerning the applicant and the grounds constituting the necessary basis for that operative part

(Arts 101, 263 and 288, fourth para., TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Arts 7 and 25)

(see paragraphs 126-131)

CompetitionAdministrative procedureStatement of objectionsProvisional characterCommission decision finding an infringementDecision not identical to the statement of objectionsInfringement of the rights of the defenceConditionDemonstration by the undertaking concerned of the imputation of new objectionsAbandonment of objections proving to be unfoundedObligation of the Commission to inform persons concerned thereof by an additional statement of objectionsNone

(Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 27(1); Commission Regulation No 773/2004, Art. 11(2))

(see paragraphs 177-181, 209, 218, 252-258)

CompetitionEU rulesSubstantive scopeConduct imposed by State measuresNot precludedConditionsExistence of State coercion capable of excluding all autonomous conduct of undertakingsBurden of proof incumbent on the undertaking relying thereonScope

(Arts 101 and 102 TFEU)

(see paragraphs 287-292, 304, 325, 334, 342-347, 351, 352)

Agreements, decisions and concerted practicesProhibitionInfringementsAgreements and concerted practices constituting a single infringementConceptUnlawful practices and conduct forming part of an overall plan with a single objectiveAssessmentCriteriaIdentical object and undertakingsNeed to define the relevant marketNoneRelevant evidence

(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Art. 8)

(see paragraphs 370-373, 380, 381, 404-407, 418, 429-433, 438, 445)

CompetitionAdministrative procedureCommission decision finding an infringementBurden of proving the infringement and its duration on the CommissionExtent of the burden of proofSingle and continuous infringementKnowledge or foreseeability of the overall plan of the agreement, decision or concerted practice and of its key elementsBody of evidence

(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Art. 8; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2) and (3))

(see paragraphs 465-467, 471-475, 480, 484)

CompetitionAdministrative procedureCommission decision finding an infringementBurden of proving the infringement and its duration on the CommissionMeans of proofReliance on a body of evidenceAssessment of the relevance and evidential value of the various items of evidence relief onImpact on the overall assessment of the body of evidence

(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53)

(see paragraphs 501, 515, 524, 530, 546-548, 570, 609, 613, 614, 629)

Action for annulmentJudgment annulling a measureScopePartial annulment of an EU legal actPartial annulment of a Commission decision classifying various incidents of anticompetitive behaviour as a single and continuous infringement and imposing a fineInadequacy of the evidence relied on in order to establish the liability of the applicant undertaking for one of the components of the single and continuous infringementNo effect on the lawfulness of the finding of that undertaking’s participation in the overall infringement

(Arts 101 and 264, first para., TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Art. 8)

(see paragraphs 580-582, 615, 630-632)

CompetitionFinesAmountDeterminationDetermination of the basic amountGravity of the infringementCriteria for assessmentNature of the infringementHorizontal cartel concerning pricesInherent seriousness of such an offence justifying the application of a high gravity factor

(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Art. 8; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2) and (3); Commission Notice 2006/C 210/02, points 19 to 23)

(see paragraphs 653-656)

CompetitionFinesAmountDeterminationDetermination of the basic amountGravity of the infringementCriteria for assessmentObligation to take account of the actual impact on the marketNone

(Art. 101(1) TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(3); Commission Notice 2006/C 210/02, points 19 to 23)

(see paragraphs 663-672)

CompetitionFinesAmountDeterminationDetermination of the basic amountDetermination of the value of salesSales carried out in direct or indirect relation to the infringementCartel in the airfreight services sectorCartel covering several elements of the price of freight servicesTaking into account of the full amount of sales related to freight servicesWhether permissibleBreach of principle of proportionalityNone

(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Art. 8; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2) and (3); Commission Notice 2006/C 210/02, points 6 and 13)

(see paragraphs 677-697)

CompetitionFinesAmountDeterminationAdjustment of the basic amountMitigating circumstancesCommission’s discretion to make a global assessmentSubstantially limited involvement criterionAssessment factors

(Art. 101 TFEU; EEA Agreement, Art. 53; EC-Switzerland Air Transport Agreement, Art. 8; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 23(2) and (3); Commission Notice 2006/C 210/02, point 29)

(see paragraphs 730-734, 745-751)

CompetitionFinesAmountDeterminationJudicial reviewUnlimited jurisdiction of the EU judicatureScopeLimitCompliance with the principle of non-discriminationAccount taken of the Guidelines on the method of setting fines

(Art. 261 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 31; Commission Notice 2006/C 210/02)

(see paragraphs 760-766)

Operative part

The Court:

Annuls Article 1(1)(i) and (j), (3)(i) and (j), and (4)(i) and (j) of Commission Decision C(2017) 1742 final of 17 March 2017 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case AT.39258 – Airfreight);

Annuls Article 1(2)(i) and (j) of that decision in so far as it finds that Latam Airlines Group SA and Lan Cargo SA participated, first, in the elements of the single and continuous infringement relating to the security surcharge and the refusal to pay commission and, second, in the element of the single and continuous infringement relating to the fuel surcharge before 22 July 2005;

Annuls Article 3(i) of that decision;

Sets the fine imposed jointly and severally on Latam Airlines Group and Lan Cargo at EUR 2 244 000;

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs.