Judgment of the General Court Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition of 9 November 2022, T-667/19

• Date: 09 November 2022
• Year: 2022

15

therefore, that it was important to facilitate the possibility for the private sphere of participating in the

financial penalisation and thus in the prevention of such conduct. The particular powers which the

national courts must have in order to remedy the information asymmetry between the parties

concerned help to achieve that objective.

From that point of view, the Court considers that to restrict at the outset evidence, the disclosure of

which may be sought, only to pre -existing documents in the control of the defendant or a third party

could, in certain cases, run counter to the primary objective pursued by Directive 2014/104.

Nonetheless, the Court points out, finally, that such an interpretation of the first subparagraph of

Article 5(1) of Directive 2014/104 does not in any way affect the application of the balancing

mechanism for the interests involved, as follows from paragraphs 2 and 3 of that article. Given that

the provisions of that directive must be implemented in compliance with the fundamental rights and

principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, it is for the

national courts, when they receive a request to disclose evidence, to restrict the disclosure of

evidence to that which is relevant, proportionate and necessary, taking into account the legitimate

interests and fundamental rights of the party to whom that request is addressed, in accordance with

Article 5(2) and (3) of that directive.

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 9 November

2022, Ferriera Valsabbia and Valsabbia Investimenti v Commission, T-655/19

Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for concrete reinforcing bars –

Decision finding an infringement of Article 65 CS after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty on the basis of

Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Fixing of prices – Limiting and controlling output and sales – Decision

adopted following the annulment of earlier decisions – Holding of a new hearing attended by the

competition authorities of the Member States – Rights of the defence – Principle of sound

administration – Reasonable time – Obligation to state reasons

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 9 November

2022, Feralpi v Commission, T-657/19

Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for concrete reinforcing bars –

Decision finding an infringement of Article 65 CS, after expiry of the ECSC Treaty, on the basis of

Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Price fixing – Limiting and controlling output and sales – Decision taken

following the annulment of earlier decisions – New hearing held in the presence of the competition

authorities of the Member States – Rights of the defence – Principle of sound administration – Reasonable

period – Obligation to state reasons – Proportionality – Ne bis in idem principle – Plea of illegality – Single,

complex and continuous infringement – Evidence of involvement in the cartel – Public distancing –

Unlimited jurisdiction

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 9 November

2022, T-667/19

Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for concrete reinforcing bars –

Decision finding an infringement of Article 65 CS, after expiry of the ECSC Treaty, on the basis of

Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 – Price fixing – Limiting and controlling output and sales – Decision taken

following the annulment of earlier decisions – New hearing held in the presence of the competition

authorities of the Member States – Rights of the defence – Principle of sound administration – Reasonable

period – Obligation to state reasons – Proportionality – Ne bis in idem principle – Plea of illegality –

Evidence of involvement in the cartel – Aggravating circumstances – Repeated infringement – Mitigating

circumstances – Equal treatment – Unlimited jurisdiction