General Technic-Otis Sàrl, General Technic Sàrl, Otis SA and Others and United Technologies Corporation v European Commission (T-141/07, T-142/07, T-145/07, T-146/07)

Judgment of 13 Jul 2011

law://eu/cjeu/2007/t-141-07/para_260@2026-11-13

260The Court recalls that Article 23(2) of Regulation No 1/2003, which is the legal basis for imposing fines in the event of infringement of the EU competition rules, confers on the Commission a margin of assessment in setting fines (see, to that effect, Case T‑229/94 Deutsche Bahn v Commission [1997] ECR II-1689, paragraph 127), which will depend, in particular, on its general policy in competition matters (Musique Diffusion française and Others v Commission, paragraph 210 above, paragraphs 105 and 109). That was the context in which, in order to ensure the transparency and objectivity of its fining decisions, the Commission adopted and published the 2002 Leniency Notice. The notice constitutes an instrument intended to define, while complying with higher-ranking law, the criteria which the Commission proposes to apply in the exercise of its discretion, which is thus subject to a self-imposed limitation (see, by analogy, Case T‑214/95 Vlaams Gewest v Commission [1998] ECR II‑717, paragraph 89), in so far as the Commission must comply with self-imposed guidelines (see, by analogy, Case T‑380/94 AIUFFASS and AKT v Commission [1996] ECR II‑2169, paragraph 57).

General Technic-Otis Sàrl, General Technic Sàrl, Otis SA and Others and United Technologies Corporation v European Commission (T-141/07, T-142/07, T-145/07, T-146/07)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections