In its judgment of 20 January 2021, Printeos (C-301/19 P), the Court of Justice confirms that as decided by the General Court, when a fine must be reimbursed by the Commission, it should also pay default interest at the ECB refinancing rate. However, it considered that the General Court erred in law with regard to the starting point for the calculation of compound interest.
In 2014, the Commission adopted a Decision (“the 2014 Decision”) and fined Printeos for infringing Article 101 TFEU by participating in an anti-competitive agreement. Printeos brought an action before the General Court against the 2014 Decision and, on 9 March 2015, made a provisional payment of the fine imposed by that Decision. In 2016, the General Court annulled the 2014 Decision as far as it concerned the fine imposed on Printeos. By way of consequence, on 1 February 2017, the Commission repaid the fine provisionally paid by Printeos. However, it rejected Printeos’ claim and refused to pay any interest. The Commission argued that, as is stipulated in its Information Note, paid fines are invested in a fund and, if the decision is annulled, are repaid together with a guaranteed return based on the benchmark performance of the fund. However, as the fund’s performance was negative during the concerned period, only the amount of the fine could be repaid to Printeos.
On 31 March 2017, Printeos brought an action asking the General Court to order the Commission to pay it, firstly, compensation of EUR 184,592.95 corresponding to compensatory interest on the amount of the fine at the ECB refinancing rate from 9 March 2015 (date of the provisional payment of the fine) to 1 February 2017 (date of the Commission’s repayment of the fine) and secondly, compensatory interest on the amount of EUR 184,592.95 for the period from 1 February 2017 to the date on which the Commission actually paid that amount, at the ECB refinancing rate.
The General Court held that pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 266 TFEU as interpreted in the case law, the Commission was required, in terms of measures to comply with the judgment of 2016, not only to repay Printeos the principal amount of the fine in question but also to pay Printeos default interest. However, on the second part of Printeos’ claim, the General Court considered that the Commission should pay Printeos compound interest only from the date of delivery of its judgment until full payment by the Commission. In other words, the General Court rejected Printeos’ claim insofar as it sought payment of compound interest from the date on which Printeos filed its action for damages.
In its judgment, the Court of Justice dismisses the appeal of the Commission but upholds Printeos’ cross-appeal with regard to the starting point of the compound interest.
The Court of Justice reiterates that, when an EU measure involving payment of an amount to the European Union is annulled, the payment of default interest constitutes a measure giving effect to a judgment annulling a measure, for the purposes of the first paragraph of Article 266 TFEU. Indeed, it is designed to compensate at a standard rate for the loss of enjoyment of the monies owed and to encourage the debtor to comply with that judgment as soon as possible. It also stipulates that the default interest rate applicable is the ECB refinancing rate plus 3.5 percentage points.
In addition, the Court of Justice considers that the particular circumstances of the present case justify the interest claimed by Printeos in its action before the Court being compounded. It indeed points out that, in the absence of such compound interest, Printeos would not be compensated for the loss of enjoyment, during the period from the date on which it brought its action until the date of delivery of the judgment under appeal, of the amount of interest which it was entitled to receive at the same time as repayment of the amount of the fine, despite the fact that it had clearly requested the Commission to pay such interest, which it unlawfully refused to pay.
In conclusion, the Court of Justice rules that the Commission should repay the fine, pay default interest of EUR 184,592.95 and compound interest on that amount from the date on which Printeos brought its action for damages before the General Court (31 March 2017), rather than from the date of the delivery of the General Court’s judgment.
Please contact Pierre de Bandt or Jeroen Dewispelaere for further information about this case and/or for general legal advice relating to competition law.