Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 12 March 2020

CompetitionAdministrative procedureExamination of complaintsDecision of the Commission suspending the procedureDiscretion of the CommissionLimitsStatement of reasons for the decision to take no actionScopeJudicial reviewScope

(Arts 101, 102, 105(1) and 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 13(2))

(see paras 42, 43, 70, 90)

CompetitionDivision of jurisdiction between the Court of Justice and national competition authoritiesCommission’s right take no action on a complaint already processed by a national competition authorityScope

(Arts 101 and 102 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Arts 5 and 13(2))

(see paras 45, 47, 48, 53, 54)

CompetitionAdministrative procedureExamination of complaintsDetermination of priorities by the CommissionCommission's duty to adopt a decision as to the existence of an infringementNoneAccount to be taken of the EU interest in investigating a caseDiscretionary power of the CommissionLimits

(Arts 101 and 102 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003; Commission Regulation No 773/2004, Art. 7(2))

(see paras 64-69)

Acts of the institutionsStatement of reasonsObligationScopePlea based on absence or inadequacy of the statement of reasonsPlea alleging incorrectness of the statement of reasonsDistinction

(Art. 296 TFEU)

(see paras 89, 97)

Acts of the institutionsNotificationIrregularitiesEffects

(Art. 263, sixth para. TFEU)

(see para. 110)

Action for annulmentJurisdiction of the EU judicatureClaim seeking that directions be issued to an institutionInadmissibility

(Arts 263 and 266, first para, TFEU)

(see paras 120, 121)

Judicial proceedingsMeasures of inquiryHearing of witnessesDiscretion of the General Court

(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 91)

(see para. 124)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 4138 final of 26 June 2018, rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant regarding infringements of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU allegedly committed by undertakings within the Subaru group in the motor vehicle distribution sector (Case AT.40037 — Carpenter/Subaru).

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the action;

Orders LL-CARPENTER s. r. o. to pay the costs.