T-612/17

ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) 17 February 2022 ( *1 ) (Rectification) In Case T-612/17, Google LLC, formerly Google Inc., established in Mountain View, California (United States), Alphabet, Inc., established in Mountain View, represented by T. Graf, R. Snelders, C. Thomas, K. Fountoukakos-Kyriakakos, lawyers, R. O’Donoghue QC, M. Pickford QC, and D. Piccinin, Barrister, applicants, supported by Computer & Communications Industry Association, established in Washington, DC (United States), represented by J. Killick and A. Komninos, lawyers, intervener, v European Commission, represented by T. Christoforou, N. Khan, A. Dawes, H. Leupold and C. Urraca Caviedes, acting as Agents, defendant, supported by Federal Republic of Germany, represented by J. Möller, S. Heimerl and S. Costanzo, acting as Agents, by EFTA Surveillance Authority, represented by C. Zatschler and C. Simpson, acting as Agents, by Bureau européen des unions de consommateurs (BEUC), established in Brussels (Belgium), represented by A. Fratini, lawyer, by Infederation Ltd, established in Crowthorne (United Kingdom), represented by A. Morfey, S. Gartagani, L. Hannah, A. D’heygere, K. Gwilliam, Solicitors, and T. Vinje, lawyer, by Kelkoo, established in Paris (France), represented by J. Koponen and B. Meyring, lawyers, by Verband Deutscher Zeitschriftenverleger eV, established in Berlin (Germany), represented by T. Höppner, professor, P. Westerhoff and J. Weber, lawyers, by Visual Meta GmbH, established in Berlin, represented by T. Höppner, professor, and P. Westerhoff, lawyer, by BDZV – Bundesverband Digitalpublisher und Zeitungsverleger eV, formerly Bundesverband Deutscher Zeitungsverleger eV, established in Berlin, represented by T. Höppner, professor, and P. Westerhoff, lawyer, and by Twenga, established in Paris, represented by L. Godfroid, S. Hautbourg and S. Pelsy, lawyers, interveners, APPLICATION under Article 263 TFEU, principally, for annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 4444 final of 27 June 2017 relating to proceedings under Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39740 – Google Search (Shopping)), and, in the alternative, for annulment or reduction of the fine imposed on the applicants, THE GENERAL COURT (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition), composed of S. Gervasoni, President, L. Madise (Rapporteur), R. da Silva Passos, K. Kowalik-Bańczyk and C. Mac Eochaidh, Judges, Registrar: E. Coulon, makes the following Order On 10 November 2021, the General Court delivered a judgment in the Case Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping) (T‑612/17, EU:T:2021:763). In accordance with Article 164(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, it is necessary to rectify clerical mistakes found in paragraph 97 and in the header of that judgment.   On those grounds, THE GENERAL COURT (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) hereby orders:   1. Paragraph 97 of the judgment must be read as   ‘By orders of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1007), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1008), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1009), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1010), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1011), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1028), and of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1029), the President of the Ninth Chamber of the General Court granted leave to intervene, respectively, to BEUC, Foundem, CCIA, VDZ, BDZV, Visual Meta and Twenga. By three other orders dated 17 December 2018 he also granted leave to intervene to the EFTA Surveillance Authority, Kelkoo and the Federal Republic of Germany. In those orders, the costs related to the interventions were reserved.’   instead of   ‘By orders of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1007), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1008), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1009), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1010), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1011), of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1028), and of 17 December 2018, Google and Alphabet v Commission (T-612/17, not published, EU:T:2018:1029), the President of the Ninth Chamber of the General Court granted leave to intervene, respectively, to BEUC, Foundem, CCIA, VDZ, BDZV, Visual Meta, Twenga, the EFTA Surveillance Authority, Kelkoo and the Federal Republic of Germany. In those orders, the costs related to the interventions were reserved.’.   2. The header of that judgment must be read as ‘Google and Alphabet v Commission (Google Shopping)’ instead of ‘Google and Alphabet v Commission’.   Luxembourg, 17 February 2022. E. Coulon Registrar S. Gervasoni President ( *1 ) Language of the case: English.