1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Fine of € 38 million (US$ 51 million) for Procedural Breach during a 'Dawn Raid' upheld by EU Court

Fine of € 38 million (US$ 51 million) for Procedural Breach during a 'Dawn Raid' upheld by EU Court

Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.15.10

Today, December 15, 2010, the EU's General Court upheld the European Commission's decision to impose a € 38 million fine on the Germany energy company E.ON for breaching a seal during an antitrust dawn raid.

The General Court held that E.ON was "required to take all necessary measures to prevent any tampering with the seal" and the Commission was entitled to conclude that, at very least, the seal had been broken negligently.  The scale of the fine was not disproportionate given (i) the seriousness of the incident; and (ii) the need to ensure that companies did not benefit from breaking seals.

This was the first case in which the Commission had imposed such a fine in procedural cases of this kind.  However, the Commission is now pursuing two other similar cases, one relating to the breach of a seal, the other to the refusal to submit to an inspection.  The Commission has powers to impose penalties of up to 1% of worldwide group turnover.  E.ON's fine, however, represented only around 0.14% of the turnover of the relevant subsidiary.

E.ON has already announced that it is "likely" to lodge an appeal to the European Court of Justice.

Background

On May 29, 2006, the Commission raided E.ON's Hamburg offices on suspicion of anticompetitive practices on the German electricity market.  The raid took place over several days and, at the end of the first day, the documentary evidence gathered by the inspectors was stored in a room on the fifth floor of E.ON's offices.  The door of this room was locked and an adhesive seal was attached across a section of the frame.  The seals used by the Commission are made of plastic film and, if removed, do not tear but show irreversible "VOID" signs on their surface.  When the Commission officials returned the next morning, they found that one of the seals had been tampered with.  In addition to the seal showing the "VOID" signs, pieces of glue were found around its edges, possibly indicating that somebody had tried to re-affix it.

The Commission concluded that the seal had been broken illegally and, on January 30, 2008, issued a decision imposing a € 38 million euro fine.

E.ON appealed the fine to the General Court arguing that the Commission had not provided sufficient evidence that E.ON had broken the seal and had failed to take into account alternative explanations including:

  • vibrations from the next-door conference room;
  • the use by cleaning staff of a potent cleaning product;
  • that the seal had (allegedly) passed its use-by date; and/or
  • that there had been a high level of humidity on the relevant day.

The General Court dismissed all of these arguments.

The judgment of the General Court is available online (French version). 

For more information, please contact the professionals listed below or your regular Crowell & Moring contacts.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25

A Sign of What’s to Come? Court Dismisses FCA Retaliation Complaint Based on Alleged Discriminatory Use of Federal Funding

On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future....