CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 13 September 2013; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases Case facts ARCHIVE—13/09/2013 Outline Appeals to the General Court seeking annulment, partial annulment and/or reductions in the level of individual fines imposed regarding the Commission's decision of 1 October 2008 finding infringements of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and imposing a fine of €128.163m on Total France jointly and severally with Total SA for their alleged participation in a price-fixing and market/customer allocation cartel concerning the supply of paraffin waxes in the European Economic Area (EEA) and slack wax in Germany between 1992 and 2005 ('Candle waxes cartel').On 13 September 2013, the General Court dismissed Total's action in its entirety but ordered a minor reduction in Total Raffinage's fine based on irregularities in the fine's calculation (in particular in relation to duration). This case focuses on, amongst other things,

CASE HUB (appeals lodged at the Court of Justice in Cases C- 88/15 (Ferriere Nord), C- 86/15 (Ferriera Valsabbia and Valsabbia Investimenti), C- 89/15 P (Riva Fire) and C- 85/15 (Feralpi)) ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 9 December 2014; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline and related/relevant cases Case facts Outline Appeals to the General Court seeking annulment, partial annulment and/or reductions in the level of individual fines imposed regarding the Commission's re-adopted decision of 30 September 2009 (as amended by a subsequent decision of 8 December 2009) relating to a proceeding previously pursued under Article 65 of the European Coal and Steel Community Treaty (ECSC) which found infringements and imposed combined fines of €85m (now €83.25m under the re-adopted decision) on eight company groups for their alleged participation in a price-fixing cartel concerning the supply of concrete bars in Italy between 1989 and 2000 ('Reinforcing bars cartel'). On 9 December 2014, the General Court dismissed the majority

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 11 July 2019; it is no longer maintained. Note–Appeals lodged before the Court of Justice in Cases C- 702/19 and C- 70/19 P. See further, timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases. Case facts Outline An appeal to the General Court seeking annulment and/or reductions in the level of fines imposed regarding the Commission’s decision of 24 June 2015 finding five infringements of Article 101 TFEU and imposing fines totalling €115.865m for their participation in the retail food packaging trays cartel. Outcome On 11 July 2019, the General Court issued its judgments, in which it:• upheld one ground of appeal raised by CCPL. In the original decision, CCPL was awarded a 25% reduction in fines based on its ability to pay. CCPL argued that the Commission had not sufficiently

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgments of 5 October 2020; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline Case facts Outline CASE HUB—Cases T- 583/18 GVN v Commission and T- 597/18 Hermann Albers v Commission—actions for annulment before the General Court of the European Commission’s decision of 12 July 2018 finding that German national legislation concerning local transport in the Land of Lower Saxony did not constitute State aid (Cases SA.46538 and SA.46697). Latest developments On 5 October 2020, the General Court issued its judgment in which it dismissed both appeals in their entirety. Parties Applicants:• Gesamtverband Verkehrsgewerbe Niedersachsen e.V (hereafter, GVN)• Hermann Albers e.K (hereafter, Hermann)Defendant:• European Commission (hereafter, the Commission) Background Background Case SA.46538 GVN is an industry association that represents the interests of its members, which are private transport undertakings which operate in the Land of Lower Saxony.On 28 September 2016, the Commission received a State aid complaint from GVN concerning Section 7a of the

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 14 March 2013; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases Case facts (ARCHIVE 14/03/2013) Outline Appeals to the General Court seeking annulment or reduction in the levels of fines imposed regarding the Commission's decision of 15 October 2008 finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and imposing fines of €45.6m on Dole and €14.7m on Del Monte (jointly and severally with Weichert) for their alleged participation in a cartel for the supply of fresh bananas to the northern European region ('Bananas cartel'). On 14 March 2013, the General Court confirmed the infringement finding (on substance) in relation to both appeals—in particular, confirming that the information at issue was not publicly available and that the exchange of such 'pre-pricing' information relating to quotations amounted to a 'concerted practice'. However, the General Court reduced Del Monte's fine to €8.8m on the basis of Del Monte's lesser involvement

CASE HUB NOTE—appeals lodged before the Court of Justice in Cases C- 331/20 and C- 343/20 ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgments of 13 May 2020; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline An action for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 29 July 2016 concerning compensation to Sardinian airports for public service obligations (Case SA.33983). Outcome On 13 May 2020, the General Court issued its judgment in which it dismissed the appeals. The General Court held (amongst other things) that the Commission: (i) had rightly found that the airlines were beneficiaries of the aid scheme owing to the grant of an advantage through state resources by payments attributable to the region of Sardinia; (ii) had been correct to characterise the compensation scheme as an aid scheme and to find that it was capable of distorting competition and having an effect of trade between Member States; and (iii) not breached

NOTE—appeals lodged before the Court of Justice in Cases C- 31/23 P, C- 30/23 P and C- 29/23 P ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 9 November 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline. Case facts Outline Appeals to the General Court seeking annulment the European Commission’s readopted decision finding infringements and imposing a fines of €16.1m for participation in a price fixing cartel in the Italian the reinforcing bars market (AT.37956). Outcome On 9 November 2022, the General Court issued its judgments in which it the General Court dismissed the appeals in their entirety as unfounded. The General Court held that the Commission committed no procedural errors in regard to its 2019 decision and the duration of proceedings was not unreasonable given the complexity of the case. Further, the ne bis in idem principle had not been infringed as the Commission's 2002

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 20 September 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline and relevant/related cases. Case facts Outline Actions for annulment before the General Court against the Commission's decision of 27 July 2017 concerning corporate tax exemptions for ports in Belgium and France (Case SA.38393. Latest developments On 20 September 2019, the General Court issued its judgments in which it dismissed the appeals in their entirety. In particular, the General Court concluded (amongst other things) that the Commission made no errors of assessment in determining that the ports were, at least in part, engaged in economic activities and therefore undertakings within the meaning of the EU State aid rules and classifying the aid measure as selective. Parties Applicants:• Autonomous Port of the Center and West SCR•

CASE HUB NOTE—appeals lodged before the Court of Justice in Cases C- 211/20 P and C- 315/18 ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 12 March 2020; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline and relevant/related cases. Case facts Outline An action for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 4 July 2016 finding aid to certain three Valencia football clubs amounted to unlawful State aid (Case SA.36387). Latest developments On 12 March 2020, the General Court issued its judgment in which it upheld the appeals and therefore annulled the Commission’s decision. In particular, the General Court concluded that Commission made a number of manifest errors when it ordered the football clubs to payback the supporting measures they had each received. The General Court criticised (amongst other things) the Commission’s failure to consider all the available evidence, that it relied on incorrect evidence and did not pursue proper benchmarks. Parties Applicants:•

CASE HUB NOTE—appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case- C- 885/19 P ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 24 September 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further: Case facts Outline An action for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 21 October 2015 finding that selective tax advantages granted to Fiat Chrysler Finance Europe by Luxembourg amounted to unlawful State aid (Case SA.38375). Latest developments On 24 September 2019, the General Court issued its judgment in which it concluded (amongst other things) that the Commission correctly found that the Luxembourg tax ruling minimised Fiat’s taxes and gave it an advantage that favoured the company over others, the Commission did not fail to establish that there was a restriction of competition and the aid at issue did not breach the principle of legal certainty or infringe the rights of the defence. Parties Applicants:• Luxembourg• Fiat Chyrsler Finance Europe (Fiat Finance)Defendant:• European Commission Background Background

CASE HUB (NOTE—appeals lodged by Philips and Infineon at Court of Justice in Cases C- 98/17 and C- 99/17; see Case C- 99/17 P Infineon Technologies v Commission) ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 15 December 2016; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline and relevant/related cases Case facts Outline Appeals to the General Court seeking annulment and/or reductions in the level of fines imposed regarding the Commission's decision of 3 September 2014 finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA Agreement and imposing individual fines of €82.78m and €20.15m on Infineon and Philips (respectively) for their alleged participation in a cartel for the supply of smart card chips ('Smart card chips cartel').  Latest development On 15 December 2016, the General Court dismissed the actions in their entirety.  Despite acknowledging certain procedural irregularities, the General Court determined that they were not sufficient to justify the requested annulment.  Furthermore, the General

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 24 September 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline and relevant/related cases. Case facts Outline An action for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 21 October 2015 finding that selective tax advantages granted to Starbucks by the Netherlands amounted to unlawful State aid (Case SA.38.374). Latest developments On 24 September 2019, the General Court issued its judgment in which it upheld the appeals and therefore annulled the Commission’s 2015 decision. The General Court concluded (amongst other things) that the Commission failed to show that the approach used by the Netherlands actually benefitted Starbucks and led to a reduction in its tax burden and for its criticism that the Dutch authorities had not analysed a royalty paid by one Starbucks subsidiary to another, without it undertaking its own assessment of whether the royalty complied against an international standard for assessing transfer prices