CINXE.COM

<!DOCTYPE HTML> <html class="page_auteur auteur_defaut composition_defaut ltr en no-js" lang="en" dir="ltr"> <head> <base href="https://www.concurrences.com/"> <script type='text/javascript'>/*<![CDATA[*/(function(H){H.className=H.className.replace(/\bno-js\b/,'js')})(document.documentElement);/*]]>*/</script> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /> <title>Cyril Sarrazin - Concurrences</title> <link rel="canonical" href="https://www.concurrences.com/en/authors/cyril-sarrazin" /> <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="Cyril Sarrazin" href="en/page/backend/?id_auteur=451" /> <link rel="icon" type="image/svg+xml" href="https://www.concurrences.com/squelettes/img/logo/favicon/favicon.svg" /> <link rel="icon" type="image/x-icon" sizes="32x32" href="https://www.concurrences.com/local/cache-gd2/38/eb53752304d66f157aaf81b9ef6dd6.ico" /> <link rel="icon" type="image/x-icon" sizes="48x48" href="https://www.concurrences.com/local/cache-gd2/2b/0d54d963c60e773622ff95e0b4c182.ico" /> <link rel="alternate icon" type="image/png" sizes="192x192" href="https://www.concurrences.com/local/cache-gd2/b8/42ed8c8a24f31e702c68b2aa6f69ba.png" /> <link rel="apple-touch-icon" href="https://www.concurrences.com/local/cache-gd2/05/6ca8b6d4c932f8e13bf741535dd98e.png" /> <script type="text/javascript"> var _paq = window._paq || []; /* tracker methods like "setCustomDimension" should be called before "trackPageView" */ _paq.push(['trackPageView']); _paq.push(['enableLinkTracking']); (function() { var u="https://matomo.concurrences.com/"; _paq.push(['setTrackerUrl', u+'matomo.php']); _paq.push(['setSiteId', '1']); var d=document, g=d.createElement('script'), s=d.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; g.type='text/javascript'; g.async=true; g.defer=true; g.src=u+'matomo.js'; s.parentNode.insertBefore(g,s); })(); </script> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /> <meta name="generator" content="SPIP 4.3.4" /> <meta name="bingbot" content="nocache" /> <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="Subscribe to the whole site" href="en/page/backend/" /> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0"> <link rel='stylesheet' href='local/cache-css/9ef4d70b4b6709daec6af6b3147131c3.css?1732788380' type='text/css' /> <script>window.MathJaxLib='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/mathjax@3/es5/tex-chtml.js';window.MathJax={ startup: { elements: ['.spip-math'] }, tex: { inlineMath: [['$', '$']] }, svg: { fontCache: 'global' } };</script><script type='text/javascript'>var var_zajax_content='content';</script><script> var mediabox_settings={"auto_detect":true,"ns":"box","tt_img":true,"sel_g":"#documents_portfolio a[type='image\/jpeg'],#documents_portfolio a[type='image\/png'],#documents_portfolio a[type='image\/gif']","sel_c":".mediabox","str_ssStart":"Slideshow","str_ssStop":"Stop","str_cur":"{current}\/{total}","str_prev":"Previous","str_next":"Next","str_close":"Close","str_loading":"Loading\u2026","str_petc":"Press \u2019Esc\u2019 to close","str_dialTitDef":"Dialogue box","str_dialTitMed":"Media display","splash_url":"","lity":{"skin":"_simple-dark","maxWidth":"90%","maxHeight":"90%","minWidth":"400px","minHeight":"","slideshow_speed":"2500","opacite":"0.8","defaultCaptionState":"expanded"}}; </script>  <style>p.spip-math {margin:1em 0;text-align: center}</style> <script type='text/javascript' src='local/cache-js/54e8ce81bfe7b8537886d04b4fb6cdfc.js?1732029944'></script>  <script type="text/javascript"> window.spipConfig ??= {}; spipConfig.select2 ??= {}; spipConfig.select2.selector ??= ''; </script><script src="https://cdn.nuclia.cloud/nuclia-video-widget.umd.js"></script><link rel="alternate" type="application/json+oembed" href="https://www.concurrences.com/oembed.api/?format=json&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.concurrences.com%2Fen%2Fauthors%2Fcyril-sarrazin" /> <script>var error_on_ajaxform='Ooops. An unexpected error prevented to submit the form. You can try again.';</script> </head> <body> <div class="page" id="page"> <header id="header" class="page-header" data-idc-header-sticky role="banner"> <section id="header-main" class="page-header__main"> <div id="header-logo" class="page-header__logo"> <a rel="start home" href="https://www.concurrences.com/en/" title="Home"> <img src='squelettes/img/logo/20ans/concurrences.svg?1704296160' alt='Concurrences' width='2750' height='800' /> </a> </div> <nav id="header-aside1" class="page-header__aside page-header__aside_1"> <span class="social social_links"> <a class="social__icon social__icon_twitter" href="https://twitter.com/CompetitionLaws" title="Visit our Twitter page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_twitter-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Twitter (opens a new window)</span> </a> <a class="social__icon social__icon_linkedin" href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/institute-of-competition-law-icl-institut-de-droit-de-la-concurrence-idc-" title="Visit our Linkedin page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_linkedin-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Linkedin (opens a new window)</span> </a> <a class="social__icon social__icon_facebook" href="https://www.facebook.com/concurrences.review/" title="Visit our Facebook page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_facebook-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Facebook (opens a new window)</span> </a> <a class="social__icon social__icon_instagram" href="https://www.instagram.com/concurrences_review/" title="Visit our Instagram page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_instagram-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Instagram (opens a new window)</span> </a> <a class="social__icon social__icon_youtube" href="https://www.youtube.com/c/ConcurrencesReview" title="Visit our Youtube page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_youtube-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Youtube (opens a new window)</span> </a> </span> <span class="lang"> <a href='https://www.concurrences.com/spip.php?action=language&var_lang=fr&redirect=%2Fen%2Fauthors%2Fcyril-sarrazin' title='Passer à la version française'>Fr</a> | <strong class="on active">En</strong> </span> <span class="about"> <a href="en/institute" title="About Concurrences"><em class="idc-icon idc-icon_info" aria-hidden></em> <span class="about__label">About</span></a> </span> </nav> <nav id="header-aside2" class="page-header__aside page-header__aside_2"> <a href="en/page/subscribe/" class="tem newsletter"><em class="idc-icon idc-icon_mail" aria-hidden></em> <span>Newsletter</span></a> <a href="en/page/login/" class="item popin link-popin-login"><em class="idc-icon idc-icon_log-in" aria-hidden></em> <span>Sign in</span></a> <a href="en/page/cart/" class="item"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_shopping-cart" aria-hidden></em> <span>Cart</span> </a> <button class="item search hide" onclick="jQuery('#header-search').toggleClass('visible');return false;"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_search" aria-hidden></em> </button> </nav> </section> <section id="header-nav" class="page-header__nav"> <nav class="navbar navbar-responsive"> <div class="menu-conteneur navbar-inner container-fluid"> <a class="btn btn-navbar navbar-toggle" data-toggle="collapse" data-target=".nav-collapse-main"><span class="icon-bar"></span><span class="icon-bar"></span><span class="icon-bar"></span></a> <div class="nav-collapse navbar-collapse nav-collapse-main collapse"><ul class="menu-liste menu-items navbar-nav nav" data-depth="0"> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item_menu"> <a href="en/bulletin/" class="menu-items__lien">Bulletin</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item_menu"> <a href="en/review/" class="menu-items__lien">Review</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item_menu"> <a href="en/events/" class="menu-items__lien">Events</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique"> <a href="en/all-books/" class="menu-items__lien">Books</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item_badge"> <a href="en/dictionary/" class="menu-items__lien">Dictionary <small>Free</small></a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_article"> <a href="en/podcasts" class="menu-items__lien">Podcasts</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_lien"> <a href="https://awards.concurrences.com" class="menu-items__lien">Awards</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item-primary"> <a href="en/abonnements/" class="menu-items__lien">Subscriptions</a> </li> </ul></div></div> </nav> </section> <section id="header-search" class="page-header__search searchbar"> <hr> <div class="searchbar-item searchbar-item_search"> <div class="searchbar-inner"> <div class="formulaire_spip formulaire_recherche form-search"> <form action="en/page/recherche/#" method="get"><div> <label for="recherche" class="over offscreen">Search:</label> <div class="input-append input-group input-group-text-search"> <input type="text" class="search text search-query form-control" name="recherche" id="recherche" accesskey="4" autocapitalize="off" autocorrect="off" placeholder="Type your search…"/> <span class="btn-group input-group-btn"> <button type="submit" class="btn btn-primary" > <i class="picto picto-search"></i> <span>Search</span> </button> </span> </div> </div></form> </div> </div> </div> </section> </header> <nav class="breadcrumb-wrapper" id="breadcrumb-wrapper" role="navigation"> <div class="container"> <ul class="breadcrumb"> <li><a href="https://www.concurrences.com/">Home</a><span class="divider"> > </span></li> <li><a href="en/page/authors/">Authors</a><span class="divider"> > </span></li> <li class="active"><span>Cyril Sarrazin</span></li> </ul> </div> </nav> <div class="central" id="central"> <div class="banner-top" id="banner-top"> <div class="container"> </div> </div> <div class="wrapper" id="wrapper"> <div class="container"> <main class="content primary" id="content" role="main"> <div class="author vcard" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"> <section class="section section_primary section_presentation"> <div class="section__container"> <div class="row presentation-auteur"> <div class="col-xs-3 col-md-2 col-logo"> <div class="col-inner"> <img src="local/cache-vignettes/L108xH107/auton451-81246.jpg?1711359621" class='spip_logo spip_logo_auteur spip_logos' width='108' height='107' alt="" itemprop='image' /> <div class="social-links"> <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/sarrazin-cyril-162806113/"><em class="idc-icon idc-icon_linkedin-fill" aria-hidden></em> Linkedin</a> </div> </div> </div> <div class="col-xs-9 col-md-7"> <div class="col-inner"> <header class="cartouche"> <span class="logo-organisation"><a href='https://curia.europa.eu' target='_blank' rel='noopener'><img src='local/cache-vignettes/L300xH53/auton3094-da121.png?1711359301' alt='European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)' width='150' height='27' /></a></span> <div class="logo-auteur-rwd"> <img src="local/cache-vignettes/L108xH107/auton451-81246.jpg?1711359621" class='spip_logo spip_logo_auteur spip_logos' width='108' height='107' alt="" itemprop='image' /> </div> <h1 class="fn" itemprop="name">Cyril Sarrazin </h1> <div class="institution">European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)</div> <div class="role"> <span class="fonction">Référendaire</span> </div> </header> <div class="main"> <div class="crayon contact-descriptif-435 texte descriptif"><p>Cyril graduated in French Public Law from the University Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne in 1995 and obtained a Master in European States’ Public comparative Law from Universit y Hamburg and Paris I in 1996, as well as a Master in European Law from the University Paris I in 1997. He passed the Bar exam in 1999 and obtained the European Law Specialization in 2003. In 1999, he worked as Legal Consultant for Coutrelis & Partners in Paris and in 2000 became associate of the Linklaters Brussels’ office, where he joined the EU and competition law practive. From 2001 to 2005, he was as Associate and then Director for the French Bars Representation in Brussels (DBF) where he was in particular in charge of the representation and the defence of the French bars interests towards the EU institutions. From 2004 to 2005 he was Information Officer of the French Delegation in the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE). During this period, he also practiced as a stand alone lawyer on EC and ECHR related matters. Cyril gave various lectures on EC law ( in particular, regarding state aids policy and financing Services of General Economic Interest) for the Lille Institute of Political Studies and Law University , as well as for the Institute of European Studies of Strasbourg (CEES) in Slovakia, Malta, Serbia and France. Since December 2005, he is Référendaire in the Chamber of the Estonian Judge Küllike Jürimäe, who is member of the Fifth Chamber of the GCEU.</p></div> <div class="p"> <a href="/en/authors/cyril-sarrazin#contact" class="btn btn-contact btn-contact-rwd btn-primary-border popin pull-left" data-href-popin="#contact">Contact</a> <div class="social-links social-links-rwd pull-right"> <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/sarrazin-cyril-162806113/"> Linkedin</a> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="col-xs-12 col-md-3 col-aside"> <div class="liste auteurs co-auteurs"> <h2>Linked authors</h2> <div class="liste-items liste-items-well"> <div class='ajaxbloc' data-ajax-env='1/rzRhW9p1Abx6Bj6r1M7UWtki7JOc8VWEJxHcYRzngRfgPYYL5E5YgIV2FnOWiO58e+3++Ii6Ew6KYvPByK5UtUPjc5lJb1bm3CsDui+nSIjjTP8J0a39CT3WQulqFqdkT7B3mgGlsZCVrLivFntzyQHuofjgn8RD2jCFJ4cH760QwxlipS00jGXBQzLDnd80lROajCnwWKZT2eQ1u3hO3n3xsqKr2cwJDxmXLdepxJ+pjvkYnb3jOfL6DDVskRW5DDZcNuQN8=' data-origin="/en/authors/cyril-sarrazin"> <div class="item"><div class="entry auteur" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"> <strong class="entry-title"> <a href="en/auteurs/anthony-abi-hanna-131054" itemprop="url"> <span class='logo-img-wrapper spip_logo' style="width:35px;"><span class="img" style="display:block;position:relative;height:0;width:100%;padding-bottom:100%;overflow:hidden;background:url(local/cache-vignettes/L70xH70/1706102297092-1846f.png?1711359704) no-repeat center;background-size:100%;"> </span></span> <span itemprop="name" class="nom">Anthony Abi Hanna</span></a> </strong> <div class="entry-content"> <span class='organisation' itemprop="worksFor" itemtype="http://schema.org/Organization">European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)</span> </div> <div class="entry-meta"> <span class="pays">Luxembourg</span> <span class="articles"><em>2</em> contributions</span> <span class="visites"><em>17747</em> visits</span> </div> </div></div> <div class="item"><div class="entry auteur" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"> <strong class="entry-title"> <a href="en/auteur/Katarina-Andova" itemprop="url"> <span class='logo-img-wrapper spip_logo' style="width:35px;"><span class="img" style="display:block;position:relative;height:0;width:100%;padding-bottom:100%;overflow:hidden;background:url(local/cache-vignettes/L70xH70/auton52877-9d2db.jpg?1711359704) no-repeat center;background-size:100%;"> </span></span> <span itemprop="name" class="nom">Katarína Andová</span></a> </strong> <div class="entry-content"> <span class='organisation' itemprop="worksFor" itemtype="http://schema.org/Organization">University of Luxembourg </span> </div> <div class="entry-meta"> <span class="pays">Luxembourg</span> <span class="articles"><em>1</em> contribution</span> <span class="visites"><em>730</em> visits</span> </div> </div></div> <div class="item"><div class="entry auteur" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"> <strong class="entry-title"> <a href="en/auteur/Giordana-Aquilea" itemprop="url"> <span class='logo-img-wrapper spip_logo' style="width:35px;"><span class="img" style="display:block;position:relative;height:0;width:100%;padding-bottom:100%;overflow:hidden;background:url(local/cache-vignettes/L70xH70/auton31303-9922f.jpg?1711359704) no-repeat center;background-size:100%;"> </span></span> <span itemprop="name" class="nom">Giordana Aquilea</span></a> </strong> <div class="entry-content"> <span class='organisation' itemprop="worksFor" itemtype="http://schema.org/Organization">European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)</span> </div> <div class="entry-meta"> <span class="pays">Luxembourg</span> <span class="articles"><em>1</em> contribution</span> <span class="visites"><em>1368</em> visits</span> </div> </div></div> <div class="item"><div class="entry auteur" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"> <strong class="entry-title"> <a href="en/auteurs/rene-barents" itemprop="url"> <span class='logo-img-wrapper spip_logo' style="width:35px;"><span class="img" style="display:block;position:relative;height:0;width:100%;padding-bottom:100%;overflow:hidden;background:url(local/cache-vignettes/L70xH70/auton127896-4d43f.png?1711359704) no-repeat center;background-size:100%;"> </span></span> <span itemprop="name" class="nom">René Barents</span></a> </strong> <div class="entry-content"> <span class='organisation' itemprop="worksFor" itemtype="http://schema.org/Organization">General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)</span> </div> <div class="entry-meta"> <span class="pays">Luxembourg</span> <span class="articles"><em>1</em> contribution</span> <span class="visites"><em>98</em> visits</span> </div> </div></div> <div class="item"><div class="entry auteur" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Person"> <strong class="entry-title"> <a href="en/authors/ludovic-bernardeau" itemprop="url"> <span class='logo-img-wrapper spip_logo' style="width:35px;"><span class="img" style="display:block;position:relative;height:0;width:100%;padding-bottom:100%;overflow:hidden;background:url(local/cache-vignettes/L70xH70/auton47016-00184.jpg?1711359685) no-repeat center;background-size:100%;"> </span></span> <span itemprop="name" class="nom">Ludovic Bernardeau</span></a> </strong> <div class="entry-content"> <span class='organisation' itemprop="worksFor" itemtype="http://schema.org/Organization">University Paris Nanterre</span> </div> <div class="entry-meta"> <span class="pays">Luxembourg</span> <span class="articles"><em>64</em> contributions</span> <span class="visites"><em>26221</em> visits</span> </div> </div></div> <div class="pagination more center"><a id='pagination_coauteurs' class='pagination_ancre'></a> <ul class="pager"> <li class="next"><a href='/en/authors/cyril-sarrazin?debut_coauteurs=5#pagination_coauteurs' class='lien_pagination more' rel='next'>More…</a></li> </ul></div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </section> <section class="section section_primary section_articles"> <div class="section__container"> <h2 class="content-inner-title"><span>Articles</span></h2> <div class="row articles colonnes_1"> <div class="col-xs-5 "> <div class="liste articles secteur_22"> <h3 class="h1"><span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye"></i> 148602</span> <span class="sep"></span> Review</h3> <div class="liste-items"> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2014/case-comments/Fine-The-Court-of-Justice-of-the-62717" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fine</strong> : The Court of Justice of the European Union rejects the appeal and recalls the underlying principles of both the review of legality and the unlimited jurisdiction <em>(Kone Oyj)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-10-24T17:02:00Z">24 October 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 166</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-62717 introduction entry-content"> <p>Appeal brought by companies of the Kone Group against the judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2011 inCase T-151/07 Kone and Others v Commission [2011] ECR II-5313, see this column.), the Court of Justice of the European Union rejects it in its entirety. For the purposes of this column, the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2014/case-comments/Fine-The-Court-of-Justice-of-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fine</strong> : The Court of Justice of the European Union confirms its case-law on the “dual basis” method <em>(Alliance One International)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-09-26T16:48:00Z">26 September 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 267</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-62715 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 26 September 2013, Alliance One International v Commission, Case C-679/11 P <br class='autobr' /> First, in Case C-668/11 P, Alliance One International Inc. brought an appeal against the judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2011 in Case T-38/05 Alliance One International v Commission [2011] ECR (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2014/case-comments/Imputability-of-the-unlawful" rel="bookmark"><strong>Imputability of unlawful conduct</strong> : The Court of Justice of the European Union rejects the appeal and examines the conditions of imputability of a subsidiary’s conduct to its two parent companies <em>(Dow Chemical, Pont de Nemours)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-09-26T13:33:00Z">26 September 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 488</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-62597 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 26 September 2013, The Dow Chemical Company v Commission, Case C-179/12 P; CJEU, 26 September 2013, EI du Pont de Nemours v Commission, Case C 172/12 P <br class='autobr' /> CJEU, 26 September 2013, EI du Pont de Nemours v Commission, Case C 172/12 P <br class='autobr' /> Two appeals against the judgment of the Court of First (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2013/case-comments/Fine-The-CJEU-rejects-the-appeal" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fine</strong>: The Court of Justice rejects the appeal and clarifies the conditions under which the European Commission renounces to impose a fine <em>(The Dow Chemical Company a.o)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-07-18T07:40:00Z">18 July 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 285</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-59091 introduction entry-content"> <p>Appeal against the judgment of the General Court of 13 July 2011 inCase T-42/07 Dow Chemical and Others v Commission (see this column).), the Court of Justice of the European Union dismisses the four pleas in law raised in its support and, therefore, the appeal in its entirety. For the purposes (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2013/case-comments/Imputability-The-CJEU-annuls-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Imputability</strong> : The CJEU annuls the GCEU judgment in so far as it concluded that the parent company did not exercise a decisive influence on its subsidiary <em>(Gosselin Group)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-07-11T06:52:00Z">11 July 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 651</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-59089 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 11 July 2013, Ziegler v Commission, C-439/11 P <br class='autobr' /> CJEU, 11 July 2013, Commission v Stichting Administratiekantoor Portilje, C-440/11 P <br class='autobr' /> CJEU, 11 July 2013, Team Relocations and others v Commission, C-444/11 P <br class='autobr' /> Several appeals against the judgments of the General Court of 16 June 2011 (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2013/case-comments/Unlimited-jurisdiction-The-CJEU-53523" rel="bookmark"><strong>Unlimited jurisdiction</strong>: The Court of Justice rejects the appeal and clarifies the conditions of exercise by the General Court of its unlimited jurisdiction <em>(Quinn Barlo)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-05-30T13:43:00Z">30 May 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 268</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-53523 introduction entry-content"> <p>Appeal brought by Quinn Barlo Ltd, Quinn Plastics NV and Quinn Platics GmbH against the judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2011 (Case T-208/06, see this column, ConcurrencesNo 1-2012).), the Court of Justice of the European Union dismisses the three pleas in law raised in its support (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="content-inner-more"> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2013/case-comments/Unlimited-jurisdiction-The-CJEU" rel="bookmark"><strong>Unlimited jurisdiction</strong>: The Court of Justice rejects the appeal and clarifies the purpose of the multiplier for deterrence <em>(Versalis)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-05-08T13:17:00Z">8 May 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 229</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-53521 introduction entry-content"> <p>Appeal brought by Versalis SpA, formerly Polimeri Europa SpA, against thejudgment of the General Court of 13 July 2011 in Case T-371/01 Polimeri Europa v Commission (Case T-59/079), the Court of Justice of the European Union dismisses the six pleas in law raised in support of that appeal. The (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2013/case-comments/Presumption-of-decisive-influence" rel="bookmark"><strong>Presumption of decisive influence</strong>: The Court of Justice rejects the appeal and rules that the rebuttable presumption of decisive influence of the parent company on its subsidiaries does not breach the right to a fair trial <em>(Eni)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-05-08T09:00:00Z">8 May 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 449</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-53519 introduction entry-content"> <p>Appeal brought by Eni SpA against the judgmentof the Court of First Instance of 13 July 2011 in Case T-371/01 Eni v Commission (Case T-39/07), the Court of Justice of the European Union rejects the two pleas in law raised in its support. The Court also had before it a cross-appeal brought by the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2013/case-comments/Association-of-chartered" rel="bookmark"><strong>Association of chartered accountants</strong>: The Court of Justice rules that the Portuguese association of chartered accountants is an association of undertakings and that a regulation relating to a system of compulsory training may restrict competition <em>(Ordem dos Técnicos Oficiais de Contas/Autorisade de Concorrência)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-02-27T23:00:00Z">28 February 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 322</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-52245 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 28 February 2013, Ordem dos Técnicos Oficiais de Contas v Autorisade de Concorrência, C-1/12 <br class='autobr' /> Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa (Lisbon District Court) (Portugal) was made to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling on the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2013/case-comments/Liability-of-the-parent-company-52249" rel="bookmark"><strong>Liability of the parent company</strong>: The Court of Justice upholds the Tribunal ruling that reduced the fine imposed on Tomkins on the ground of the reduction of the fine imposed on its subsidiary <em>(Tomkins)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-02-21T23:00:00Z">22 February 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 334</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-52249 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 22 January 2013, Commission v Tomkins plc, Case C-286/11 P <br class='autobr' /> Appeal brought by the Commission against the judgment of the General Court of 24 March 2011 inCase T-382/06 Tomkins v Commission [2011] ECR II-1157, p. 153.), the Court, sitting as a Grand Chamber, dismisses all five pleas in law (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2013/case-comments/Competitor-operating-unlawfully-on" rel="bookmark"><strong>Competitor operating unlawfully on the market</strong>: The Court of Justice rules that EU cartel rules should apply even if the intended target of a prohibited agreement allegedly operated unlawfully on the market <em>(Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky/Slovenská sporitel’ňa)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2013-02-06T23:00:00Z">7 February 2013</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 241</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-52247 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 7 February 2013, Protimonopolný úrad Slovenskej republiky v Slovenská sporitel ’ňa, Case C-68/12 <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Union by the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky (Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic) for a preliminary ruling on the substance (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2013/case-comments/Single-and-continuous-infringement" rel="bookmark"><strong>Single and continuous infringement</strong>: The Court of Justice welcomes the appeal lodged by the Commission and reduces a fine to the amount of EUR 35 000 <em>(Verhuizingen Coppens)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-12-05T23:00:00Z">6 December 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 485</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-50435 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 6 December 2012, C-441/11 P, Commission v Verhuizingen Coppens NV <br class='autobr' /> Appeal brought on 16 June 2011 by the European Commission (hereinafter ’the Commission’) against thejudgment of the General Court of 16 June 2011 in Case T-379/01 Verhuizingen Coppens v Commission (Case T-210/08, not yet (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2013/case-comments/Evidence-The-General-Court-of-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Evidence</strong>: The General Court confirms, based on a detailed examination of the evidence in the case-file, the participation the enterprise to the infringement on the market for flat glass in the EEA <em>(Guardian Industries)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-09-26T22:00:00Z">27 September 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 230</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-50439 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 27 September 2012, T-82/08, Guardian Industries Corp. and others v. Commission <br class='autobr' /> Action brought by Guardian Industries Corp and Guardian Europe Sarl against Commission Decision C(2007) 5791 final of 28 November 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2012/case-comments/Imputability-The-Court-approves" rel="bookmark"><strong>Imputability</strong>: The Court of Justice approves the “dual basis” method used by the Commission under the condition of respect of the principle of the equal treatment <em>(Alliance One International)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-07-18T22:00:00Z">19 July 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 276</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-49401 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU (gde ch.), 19 July 2012, Joined Cases C-628/10 P and C 14/11 P, Alliance One International v Commission <br class='autobr' /> Referral of two appeals brought by Alliance One International and Standard Commercial Tobacco and of a cross-appeal brought by the Commission against the judgment of the General Court (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2012/case-comments/Fundamental-rights-The-Court" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fundamental rights</strong>: The Court of Justice rejects the appeal and postpones the examination of the legality of the EU Commission’s investigative and decisional functions regarding fundamental rights <em>(Kaimer)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-07-18T22:00:00Z">19 July 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 148</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-49403 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 19 July 2012, Kaimer GmbH and Others v Commission, Case C-264/11 P <br class='autobr' /> Appeal against the judgmentof the General Court of 24 March 2011, Kaimer and Others v Commission (Case T-379/06), the Court dismissed all the pleas in law raised and, therefore, the action. <br class='autobr' /> Although those pleas in law (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2012/case-comments/Limit-of-10-of-the-total-turnover" rel="bookmark"><strong>Limit of 10 % of the total turnover</strong>: The Court of Justice rejects the appeal and recalls the rules regarding the fine’s limit of 10 % of the total turnover <em>(Cetarsa)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-07-11T22:00:00Z">12 July 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 193</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-49398 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 12 July 2012, C-181/11 P, Cetarsa / Commission <br class='autobr' /> Appeal brought by Cetarsa (hereinafter ’the appellant’) and cross-appeal brought by the Commission against thejudgment of the General Court of 3 February 2011 in Case T-212/08 Cetarsa v Commission (Case T-33/05), the Court rejects them both (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2012/case-comments/Quantitative-selective" rel="bookmark"><strong>Quantitative selective distribution system</strong>: The Court of Justice interprets the concept of “specified criteria” concerning a quantitative selective distribution system <em>(Auto 24)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-06-13T22:00:00Z">14 June 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 317</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-48291 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 14 June 2012, Auto 24, box C-158/11 <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Union by a reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) from the Cour de cassation (Court of Cassation), which was asked to rule, in substance, on whether the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2012/case-comments/Cartels-Reasonable-time-The-GCEU" rel="bookmark"><strong>Cartels - Reasonable time</strong>: The General Court examines the legality of length of the judicial procedure and rejects an application <em>(Imperial Chemical Industries)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-06-04T22:00:00Z">5 June 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 195</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-48297 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 5 June 2012, Imperial Chemical Industries v Commission, Case T-214/06 <br class='autobr' /> An action has been brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 2098 final of 31 May 2006 (Case COMP/F/38.645 - Methacrylates) and, in the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2012/case-comments/Jurisdictional-review-Unlimited" rel="bookmark"><strong>Jurisdictional review - Unlimited jurisdiction</strong>: The Court of Justice rejects two appeals and declares inadmissible the plea of illegality concerning the EU Commission’s investigative and decisional functions <em>(Legris Industries, Comap)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-05-02T22:00:00Z">3 May 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 299</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-48288 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 3 May 2012, Comap v Commission, Case C-290/11 P <br class='autobr' /> CJEU, 3 May 2012, Legris Industries v Commission, Case C-289/11 P <br class='autobr' /> Two separate appeals against the judgments of the Court of First Instance of 24 March 2011 in Cases T 376/06 and T 377/06 (review Concurrences, 2/2011, p. 98).), the Court (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2012/case-comments/Fines-The-CJUE-dismisses-appeals" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fines</strong>: The Court of Justice dismisses appeals and examines specifically the elements of calculation of the fines in the copper industrial tubes case <em>(KME Germany)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-02-15T17:30:02Z">15 February 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 391</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-42259 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 8 December 2011, KME Germany and Others v Commission, Case C-272/09 P, "Industrial copper tubes and copper plumbing tubes". <br class='autobr' /> CJEU, 8 December 2011, KME Germany and Others v Commission, Case C-389/10 P, "Industrial copper tubes and copper plumbing tubes". <br class='autobr' /> On 8 December last, the Court of (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2012/case-comments/Fines-The-CJUE-dismisses-an-appeal" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fines</strong>: The Court of Justice dismisses an appeal and specifically confirms that the appealed judgement was sufficiently reasoned concerning the adjustment of the fine in the copper industrial tubes case <em>(Chalkor/Commission)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-02-15T17:30:01Z">15 February 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 308</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-42261 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 8 December 2011, Chalkor v Commission, Case C-386/10 P, "Industrial copper tubes and copper plumbing tubes". <br class='autobr' /> On 8 December last, the Court of Justice delivered a judgment in Case C-386/10 P seeking the annulment of the judgment of the Court of First Instance in Case T-21/05, by which the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2012/case-comments/Fines-Liability-of-the-parent" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fines – Liability of the parent company</strong>: The General Court partially confirms a contested decision and expressly declares that the parent company shall only be liable for the period of the infringement during which the parent company and the subsidiary constituted an undertaking in the Spanish raw tobacco case <em>(Agroexpansión and Alliance One International)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-02-15T17:30:00Z">15 February 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 351</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-42263 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 12 October 2011, Agroexpansión v Commission, Case T-38/05, "Raw Tobacco - Spain". <br class='autobr' /> Trib. EU, 12 October 2011, Alliance One International v. Commission, Case T-41/05, "Raw Tobacco - Spain". <br class='autobr' /> On 12 October 2011, the General Court delivered two judgments concerning the actions brought (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2012/case-comments/Single-and-continuous-infringement-42266" rel="bookmark"><strong>Single and continuous infringement</strong>: The General Court partially annuls a contested decision in particular on the ground of a lack of evidence methacrylates case <em>(Quinn Barlo)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-02-15T17:29:55Z">15 February 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 579</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-42266 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 30 November 2011, Quinn Barlo and Others v. Commission, Case T-208/06, "Methacrylates". <br class='autobr' /> Primarily, the Court of First Instance has brought an action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) 2098 final of 31 May 2006 (Case COMP/F/38.645 - Methacrylates) and, in the alternative, (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2012/case-comments/parental-liability-fines-the-general-court-states-that-a-distinction-shall-be-en" rel="bookmark"><strong>Parental liability – Fines</strong>: The General Court states that a distinction shall be made between the concept of economical autonomy of a full-function joint venture and the concept of autonomy as regards the adoption of its strategic decisions <em>(EI DuPont de Nemours, Dow Chemical)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-02-01T23:00:00Z">2 February 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 375</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-45831 introduction entry-content"> <p>GCEU, 2 February 2012, EI du Pont de Nemours a.o. v. Commission, Case T-76/08, "Market for chloroprene rubber". <br class='autobr' /> GCEU, 2 February 2012, Dow Chemical v. Commission, Case T-77/08, "Market for chloroprene rubber". <br class='autobr' /> On 2 February 2008, the Court of First Instance of the European Union delivered (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2012/case-comments/anticompetitive-practices-the-advocate-general-kokott-proposes-the-confirmation" rel="bookmark"><strong>Anticompetitive practices</strong>: The Advocate General Kokott proposes the confirmation of the General Court’s judgment in the Spanish tobacco case<em> (Alliance One International and Standard Commercial Tobacco ; Alliance One International)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2012-01-11T23:00:00Z">12 January 2012</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 210</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-45951 introduction entry-content"> <p>In her Opinion delivered on 12 January 2012 in Joined Cases C 628/10 P and C 14/11 P concerning the cartel on the Spanish raw tobacco market, Advocate General Juliane Kokott proposed that the Court should dismiss in their entirety the appeals brought both by the appellants at first instance, (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2011/case-comments/Imputability-Leniency-notice-The" rel="bookmark"><strong>Imputability – Leniency notice</strong>: The General Court confirms the applicant’s liability as of the parent company and rejects the Commission’s counterclaim for increasing the fine <em>(Transcatab)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-10-04T22:00:00Z">5 October 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 422</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-39938 introduction entry-content"> <p>GCEU, 5 October 2011, Transcatab v. Commission, case T-39/06, "Raw Tobacco - Italy". <br class='autobr' /> On 5 October 2011, the Court of First Instance dismissed in its entirety, first, the action brought by Transcatab seeking partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2005) 4012 final of 20 October 2005 (Case (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2011/case-comments/Duration-of-the-participation-to" rel="bookmark"><strong>Duration of the participation to the infringement</strong>: The General Court substantially reduces the fine on the basis of the proportionality principle <em>(Romana Tabacchi)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-10-04T22:00:00Z">5 October 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 455</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-39940 introduction entry-content"> <p>GCEU, 5 October 2011, Romana Tabacchi v. Commission, case T-11/06, "Raw Tobacco - Italy". <br class='autobr' /> On 5 October 2011, the Court of First Instance delivered a judgment in which it, on the one hand, accepted in part the arguments relating to the findings as to the participation of Romana Tabacchi in the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2011/case-comments/Fines-Basic-amount-The-GCEU" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fines – Basic amount</strong>: The General Court upholds the contested decision and describes the successive steps of the calculation of fines <em>(Lucite)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-09-14T22:00:00Z">15 September 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 451</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-39932 introduction entry-content"> <p>GCEU, 15 September 2011, Lucite International and Lucite International UK v. Commission, Case T-216/06, "Methacrylates". <br class='autobr' /> In a judgment delivered on 15 September 2011, the Court of First Instance confirmed in its entirety Commission Decision C(2006) 2098 final of 31 May 2006 (Case COMP/F/38.645 (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2011/case-comments/Leniency-notice-Obligation-to" rel="bookmark"><strong>Leniency notice – Obligation to cooperate </strong>: The General Court recalls the consequence of the Commission’s decision to grant an undertaking immunity from any fine, regarding the obligation to cooperate fully, on a continuous basis and expeditiously throughout the Commission’s administrative procedure <em>(Deltafina ; Alliance One International)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-09-08T22:00:00Z">9 September 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 559</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-39936 introduction entry-content"> <p>GCEU, 9 September 2011, Deltafina v. Commission, Case T-12/06, "Raw Tobacco - Italy". <br class='autobr' /> GCEU, 9 September 2011, Alliance One International v. Commission, Case T-25/06, "Raw Tobacco - Italy". <br class='autobr' /> On 9 September 2011, the General Court dismissed in their entirety the two actions brought respectively (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2011/case-comments/Imputability-Fines-The-GCEU-37319" rel="bookmark"><strong>Imputability – Fines</strong> : The GCEU substantially reduces the fine imposed on a producer of acrylic glass and confirms its case-law on the rebuttable presumption that the parent company exercises decisive influence over the conduct of its subsidiary <em>(Total SA, Elf Aquitaine v. Commission ; Arkema France, Arkema International and Altumax Europe, v. Commission ; “Méthacrylates”)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-08-30T09:52:26Z">30 August 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 254</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-37319 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. UE, June 7, 2011, Total and Elf Aquitaine v. Commission, Case T-206/06, "Methacrylates". <br class='autobr' /> Trib. EU, June 7, 2011, Arkema France and others v. Commission, Case T-217/06, "Methacrylates". <br class='autobr' /> In two judgments delivered on 7 June 2011, the Court of First Instance confirmed the fine imposed in (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2011/case-comments/Participation-to-the-infringement" rel="bookmark"><strong>Participation to the infringement – Repeated infringement</strong>: The General Court annuls the contested decision for lack of evidence concerning the participation of certain applicants in the infringement and the legal conditions for increasing the fine of others for recidivism <em>(Shell Petroleum, ENI, Dow Chemical, Kaučuk, Unipetrol, Trade-Stomil and Polimeri Europa, “Rubber”)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-07-12T22:00:00Z">13 July 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 470</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-39924 introduction entry-content"> <p>GCEU, 13 July 2011, Shell Petroleum a.o. v. Commission, Case T-38/07, "Rubber". <br class='autobr' /> GCEU, 13 July 2011, ENI v. Commission, Case T-39/07, "Rubber". <br class='autobr' /> GCEU, 13 July 2011, Dow Chemical a.o. v. Commission, Case T-42/07, "Rubber". <br class='autobr' /> GCEU, 13 July 2011, Kaučuk v. Commission, case T-44/07, "Rubber". (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2011/case-comments/Notion-of-undertaking-Imputability" rel="bookmark"><strong>Notion of undertaking – Imputability</strong>: The General Court accepts to rebut the presumption of decisive influence by a parent company <em>(International Removal Services)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-06-16T09:52:00Z">16 June 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 633</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-37339 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 16 June 2011, Ziegler v Commission, Case T-199/08, "International removal services". <br class='autobr' /> Trib. UE, 16 June 2011, Team Relocations and Amertranseuro International and Others v Commission, cases T-199/08 and T-212/08, "International removal services". <br class='autobr' /> Trib. UE, 16 June 2011, Gosselin (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2011/case-comments/Imputability-Fines-The-GCEU" rel="bookmark"><strong>Imputability – Fines</strong>: The General Court substantially reduces the fine imposed on a producer of acrylic glass and confirms its case-law on the rebuttable presumption that the parent company exercises decisive influence over the conduct of its subsidiary <em>(Total et Elf Aquitaine, Arkema)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-06-07T09:52:00Z">7 June 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 544</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-37320 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. UE, June 7, 2011, Total and Elf Aquitaine v. Commission, Case T-206/06, "Methacrylates". <br class='autobr' /> Trib. EU, June 7, 2011, Arkema France and others v. Commission, Case T-217/06, "Methacrylates". <br class='autobr' /> In two judgments delivered on 7 June 2011, the Court of First Instance confirmed the fine imposed in (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2011/case-comments/Potential-competitor-The-GCEU" rel="bookmark"><strong>Potential competitor</strong>: The General Court clarifies the notion of potential competitor and upholds the fine imposed on a company who manages an international payment card network <em>(Visa Europe / Visa International Service)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-04-04T09:52:00Z">4 April 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 658</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-37315 introduction entry-content"> <p>GCEU, 14 April 2011, Visa Europe and Visa International Service v. Commission, Case T-461/07 <br class='autobr' /> Primarily, by way of an action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2007)4471 final of 3 October 2007 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (COMP/D1/37860 - (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2011/Case-Comments-1154/Attributability-of-the-conduct" rel="bookmark"><strong>Accountability of the conduct – Fines</strong>: The General Court cancels fines imposed to certain undertakings in the copper fittings sector <em>(Viega, Legris Industries, Comap, IMI, Kaimer, FRA.BO, Tomkins, IBP, Aalberts Industries, Pegler)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-03-24T15:55:00Z">24 March 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 927</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-35960 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 24 March 2011, Viega v Commission, Case T-375/06, "Fittings". <br class='autobr' /> Trib. UE, 24 March 2011, Legris Industries v. Commission, Case T-376/06, "Fittings". <br class='autobr' /> Trib. EU, 24 March 2011, Comap v Commission, Case T-377/06, "Fittings". <br class='autobr' /> Trib. EU, 24 March 2011, IMI and Others v Commission, Case (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2011/Case-Comments-1154/Attributability-of-the-conduct-35953" rel="bookmark"><strong>Accountability of the conduct - Fines</strong>: The General Court draws conclusions out of the belonging to a group of companies for the calculation of the fine <em>(World Wide Tobacco España)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-03-08T15:53:00Z">8 March 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 714</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-35953 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 8 March 2011, World Wide Tobacco España v Commission, Case T-37/05, "Raw Tobacco - Spain". <br class='autobr' /> In a judgment of 8 March 2011, the Court of First Instance confirmed to a very large extent Commission Decision C(2004) 4030 final of 20 October 2004 concerning the cartel on the Spanish market (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2011/Case-Comments-1154/Collective-agreement-The-CJEU" rel="bookmark"><strong>Collective agreement</strong>: The Court of Justice declares the French scheme for supplementary reimbursement of healthcare costs for the French traditional bakery sector compatible with Article 101 TFEU <em>(AG2R Prévoyance)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-03-03T15:54:00Z">3 March 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 758</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-35943 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 3 March 2011, AG2R Prévoyance, case C-437/09 <br class='autobr' /> (See also, infra, "Unilateral practices", obs. A.-L. Sibony and "Public Sector", obs. J.-Ph. Kovar) <br class='autobr' /> Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal de grande instance de Périgueux (France), the Court of Justice was asked to rule, in (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2011/Case-Comments-1154/Fines-Deterrent-effect-The-GCEU" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fines – Deterrent effect</strong>: The General Court upholds the calculation of the fine regarding the 10 % of the annual turnover limit <em>(Cetarsa)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2011-02-03T15:53:00Z">3 February 2011</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1026</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-35951 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 3 February 2011, Cetarsa v. Commission, Case T-33/05, "Raw Tobacco - Spain". <br class='autobr' /> In a judgment of 3 February 2011, the Court of First Instance confirmed to a very large extent Commission Decision C(2004) 4030 final of 20 October 2004 on the cartel on the Spanish market for the purchase (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2011/case-comments/Horizontal-agreements-The-European" rel="bookmark"><strong>Horizontal agreements</strong>: The European Commission adopts two new block exemption regulations and new guidelines on horizontal co-operation agreements</a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2010-12-14T10:57:00Z">14 December 2010</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 2359</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-34020 introduction entry-content"> <p>Commission Regulation (EU) No 1217/2010 of 14 December 2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to certain categories of research and development agreements, OJEU No L. 335 of 18 December 2010, p. 36. Commission Regulation (EU) No 1218/2010 (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2011/case-comments/Responsability-of-the-unlawful" rel="bookmark"><strong>Responsability of the unlawful conduct</strong>: The General Court partially confirms the decision of the Commission fining parent companies for the unlawful conduct of their subsidiary <em>(Alliance One International)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2010-10-27T09:28:00Z">27 October 2010</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1596</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-34022 introduction entry-content"> <p>Trib. EU, 27 October 2010, Alliance One International and Others v. Commission, Case T-24/05. <br class='autobr' /> In a judgment of 27 October 2010, the Court of First Instance partially upheld Commission Decision C(2004) 4030 final of 20 October 2004 relating to the cartel on the Spanish market for the purchase (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2010/case-comments/Fine-imposed-to-a-subsidiary-The" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fine imposed to a subsidiary</strong>: The General Court tends to clarify the conditions under which successive parent companies can be held jointly and severally liable of the fine imposed to their subsidiary <em>(Trioplast Industrier)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2010-09-13T09:10:00Z">13 September 2010</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1280</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-32945 introduction entry-content"> <p>GCEU, 13 September 2010, Trioplast Industrier v. Commission, Case T-40/06 <br class='autobr' /> By judgment of 13 September 2010, the General Court partially annulled Commission Decision C(2005) 4634 final of 30 November 2005 relating to the cartel on the industrial bags market extended to the territories of (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2010/case-comments/Rights-to-an-effective-remedy-and" rel="bookmark"><strong>Rights to an effective remedy and to an impartial tribunal</strong> : The ECJ upholds the fine while reinforcing the rights to an effective remedy and of access to an impartial tribunal of the undertakings <em>(Knauf Gips)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2010-07-01T14:53:00Z">1 July 2010</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1874</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-32941 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 1 July 2010, Knauf Gips v Commission, Case C-407/08 P, <br class='autobr' /> In a judgment on appeal delivered on 1 July 2010, the Court of Justice of the European Union upheld the fine imposed on Knauf Gips KG as the party responsible for the entire conduct of the Knauf Group. <br class='autobr' /> For the purposes of this (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2010/Case-Comments-1088/Repeated-infringement-The-Court-of" rel="bookmark"><strong>Repeated infringement</strong>: The ECJ confirms and develops its case law concerning characterisation of a repeated infringement as an aggravating circumstance <em>(Lafarge)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2010-06-17T09:04:00Z">17 June 2010</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1420</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-31957 introduction entry-content"> <p>CJEU, 17 June 2010, Lafarge v Commission, Case C-413/08 P <br class='autobr' /> In a judgment on appeal delivered on June 17, 2010, the Court of Justice of the European Union upheld the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of July 8, 2008 in CaseT 54/03 Lafarge v. Commission (not published in the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2010/Case-Comments-1088/Insufficient-of-proof-Fine" rel="bookmark"><strong>Insufficient of proof - Fine mitigating</strong>: The General Court partially upholds the Commission decision in the copper plumbing tubes sector but rules that the Commission has sufficiently demonstrated the uninterrupted participation in the cartel of some participants and has infringed the principle of equal treatment when calculating the fines imposed to some of them <em>(Copper plumbing tube industry)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2010-05-19T20:16:00Z">19 May 2010</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1420</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-31963 introduction entry-content"> <p>General Court, 19 May 2010, Wieland-Werke a.o. v. Commission, Case T-11/05, Copper plumbing tube industry General Court, 19 May 2010, IMI a.o. v. Commission, Case T-18/05, Copper plumbing tube industry General Court, 19 May 2010, Boliden a.o. v. Commission, Case T-19/05, Copper plumbing tube (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2010/case-comments/Fixation-of-fines-The-ECJ-upholds" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fixation of fines</strong>: The ECJ upholds the analysis of the CFI and rejects, on procedural grounds, claims that the Commission mistakenly took into account captive uses in the determination of market power <em>(Le Carbone Lorraine)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-11-12T11:37:00Z">12 November 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1871</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-30309 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, November 12, 2009, Le Carbone Lorraine v. Commission, Case C-554/08 P ECJ, 12 November 2009, SGL Carbon v Commission, Case C-564/08 P <br class='autobr' /> These two rulings handed down on the same day dismissed the appeals brought respectively by Carbone Lorraine and SGL Carbon against the CFI rulings of (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2010/case-comments/Exemption-The-ECJ-upholds-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Exemption</strong>: The ECJ upholds the analysis of the CFI on restrictions of parallel trades in medicines and restriction of competition by oject <em>(GlaxoSmithKline)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-10-06T10:39:00Z">6 October 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 3009</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-30307 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 6 October 2009, GlaxoSmithKline and Others, cases C-501/06, C-513/06, C-515/06 and C-519/06P. <br class='autobr' /> By Decision 2001/791/EC of 8 May 2001 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC [Cases: IV/36.957/F3, Glaxo Wellcome (notification); IV/36.997/F3, Aseprofar and Fedifar (complaint); (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2009/case-comments/Presumption-of-decivise-influence" rel="bookmark"><strong>Presumption of decivise influence</strong> : The CFI confirms the European Commission’s decision and applies the case-law on the presumption that the parent company holding 100% or almost 100% of the capital of a subsidiary exercises decisive influence over the conduct of its subsidiary <em>(Hoechst ; Arkema ; Elf Aquitaine ; Akzo Nobel e.a.)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-09-30T06:18:00Z">30 September 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 3124</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-29238 introduction entry-content"> <p>– <br class='autobr' /> CFI, 30 September 2009, Hoechst GmbH v. Commission, caseT-161/05 CFI, 30 September 2009, Arkema SA v. Commission, case T-168/05 CFI, 30 September 2009, Elf Aquitaine SA v. Commission, case T-174/05 CFI, 30 September 2009, Akzo Nobel NV a.o. v. Commission, case T-175/05 <br class='autobr' /> Four actions for (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2009/case-comments/Regime-of-imputability-The-ECJ" rel="bookmark"><strong>Regime of imputability</strong>: The ECJ rejects appeal against the CFI’s judgment in the Club Lombard case <em>(Erste Group Bank / Club Lombard)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-09-24T06:19:00Z">24 September 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 2811</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-29225 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 24 September 2009, Erste Group Bank AG and Others v Commission, cases C-125/07 P, C-133/07 P, C-135/07 P and C-137/07 P, "Club Lombard" case <br class='autobr' /> In support of their appeals against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 14 December 2006 in Joined Cases T (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2009/case-comments/Obligation-of-state-reasons-The" rel="bookmark"><strong>Obligation of state reasons</strong>: The ECJ rejects the appeal against the CFI’s judgment <em>(William Prym)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-09-03T20:15:00Z">3 September 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1719</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-29683 introduction entry-content"> <p>In support of their appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 12 December 2007 in Case T 30/05 Prym and Prym Consummer v Commission (not published in the ECR) (see note C. S., ConcurrencesNo. 4-2007, pp. 64-65.), the applicants put forward five (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2010/case-comments/Exemption-of-exclusive" rel="bookmark"><strong>Exemption of exclusive distribution agreements</strong>: The ECJ recalls its case-law on the exemption of exclusive distribution agreements for motor-vehicle fuels <em>(Lubricantes y Carburantes Galaicos ; GALP Energía España)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-09-03T10:41:00Z">3 September 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 2462</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-30305 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ (Ord.), 3 September 2009, Lubricantes y Carburantes Galaicos SL (Lubricarga) v GALP Energía España SAU, Case C-506/07 <br class='autobr' /> Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Audiencia Provincial de la Coruña (Spain) by order adopted on the basis of the first subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2009/case-comments/Obligation-to-state-reasons-The" rel="bookmark"><strong>Obligation to State reasons</strong>: The ECJ rejects the appeal against the CFI’s judgment <em>(William Prym)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-09-03T06:21:00Z">3 September 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 1877</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-29221 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 3 September 2009, William Prym GmbH & Co KG and Others v Commission, Case C-534/07 P <br class='autobr' /> In support of their appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 12 December 2007 in Case T 30/05 Prym and Prym Consummer v Commission (not published in (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2009/case-comments/annulation-of-judgment-the-ecj-partially-annuls-the-cfi-s-judgment-in-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Annulation of judgment</strong>: The ECJ partially annuls the CFI’s judgment in the citric acid case <em>(Archer Daniels Midlands)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-07-09T06:27:00Z">9 July 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 2186</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-29217 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 9 July 2009, Archer Daniels Midlands Co. v. Commission, Case C-511/06 P <br class='autobr' /> In support of his appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 27 September 2006 in Case T 59/02 Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) v Commission [2006] ECR II 3627 (see footnote (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2009/case-comments/Motor-vehicle-fuels-exclusive" rel="bookmark"><strong>Motor-vehicle fuels exclusive distribution</strong> : The ECJ interprets the conditions under which the exemption regimes under Reg. 1984/83 and 2790/1999 apply <em>(Pedro IV Servicios / Total España)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-04-02T21:17:00Z">2 April 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 2796</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-25998 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 2.4.09, Pedro IV Servicios SL v. Total España SA, case C-260/07 <br class='autobr' /> Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona (Spain) has once again given the Court of Justice an opportunity to interpret the provisions of Article 81 EC and Articles 11 and 12 of Commission (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2009/case-comments/fine-mitigating-the-ecj-rejects-adm-s-appeal-against-the-cfi-s-judgment-in-the-en" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fine mitigating</strong>: The ECJ rejects ADM’s appeal against the CFI’s judgment in the Sodium gluconate case <em>(Archer Daniels Midland)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2009-03-19T22:18:00Z">19 March 2009</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 2678</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-25996 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 19 March 2009, Archer Daniels Midland v Commission, Case C-510/06 P <br class='autobr' /> In support of its appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 27 September 2006 in CaseT 329/01 Archer Daniels Midland v Commission [2006] ECR II 3255, by which the Court (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2009/case-comments/Reduction-of-capacities-The-ECJ" rel="bookmark"><strong>Reduction of capacities</strong>: The ECJ rules that the arrangement concluded between the main Irish beef processors requiring a reduction of processing capacity has as its object the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition <em>(Beef Industry Development Society)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2008-11-20T20:07:00Z">20 November 2008</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4210</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-23360 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 20 November 2008, Competition Authority v. Beef Industry Development Society Ltd, Barry Brothers (Carrigmore) Meats Ltd, case. C-209/07 <br class='autobr' /> Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Supreme Court of Ireland has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities for a preliminary (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2008/Case-Comments-768/Nullity-The-ECJ-details-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Nullity</strong>: The ECJ details the conditions of compatibility of exclusive supply contracts for petroleum products and other related products and the automatic nullity principle provided for in Article 88(2) <em>(CEPSA Estacione de Servicio)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2008-09-11T18:42:00Z">11 September 2008</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 3660</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-22263 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 11 September 2008, CEPSA Estacione de Servicio SA, case C-279/06 <br class='autobr' /> Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Audiencia Provincial de Madrid (Spain) was made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Audiencia Provincial de Madrid (Provincial Court, Madrid), which (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2008/Case-Comments-768/Cartel-The-CFI-upholds-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Cartel</strong>: The CFI upholds the Commission’s decision in the cartel on the plasterboard market <em>(Lafarge SA)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2008-07-08T18:40:00Z">8 July 2008</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 3717</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-22267 introduction entry-content"> <p>CFI, 8 July 2008, Saint-Gobain Gyproc Belgium NV v. Commission, "Plasterboard", Case T-50/03 CFI, 8 July 2008, Knauf Gips KG v. Commission, "Plasterboard", Case T-52/03 CFI, 8 July 2008, BPB plc v. Commission, "Plasterboard", Case T-53/03 CFI, 8 July 2008, Lafarge SA v. Commission, (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2008/Case-Comments-768/Cartel-The-CFI-confirms-the-EU" rel="bookmark"><strong>Cartel</strong>: The CFI confirms the European Commission’s decision to sanction a consultancy firm which contributed actively and intentionally to a cartel between producers which were active on a market other than that the one it operated on <em>(Treuhand)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2008-07-08T18:39:00Z">8 July 2008</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 3433</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-22269 introduction entry-content"> <p>CFI, 8 July 2008, AC-Treuhand AG v. Commission, "Organic peroxides", case T-99/04 <br class='autobr' /> In its Decision 2005/349/EC of 10 December 2003, the Commission imposed sanctions under Article 81 EC on several undertakings, including three producers of organic peroxides, in connection with a cartel concluded (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2008/Case-Comments-702/Fine-setting-The-ECJ-confirms-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fine setting</strong>: The ECJ confirms the CFI judgment in the methionine cartel case <em>(Evonik Degussa)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2008-05-22T14:49:00Z">22 May 2008</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 3898</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-20000 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 22 May 2008, Evonik Degussa GmbH v Commission, Case C-266/06 P <br class='autobr' /> Appeal against the judgmentof the Court of First Instance of 5 April 2006 in Case T 279/02 Degussa v Commission, see in particular note by Mr Debroux, ConcurrencesNo 3-2006, p. 85.), the Court of Justice confirmed the solution (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2008/Case-Comments-702/National-regulations-The-ECJ" rel="bookmark"><strong>National regulations</strong>: The ECJ confirms its Arduino and Cipolla case-law and rules that Articles 81 EC and 10 EC combined do not preclude the Italian law prohibiting derogations from the minimum limits for the lawyer’s fees <em>(Hospital Consulting / Esaote)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2008-05-05T21:00:00Z">5 May 2008</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4064</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-19998 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ (Ord.), 5 May 2008, Hospital Consulting Srl and Others v Esaote SpA and Others, Case C-386/07. <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) for a preliminary ruling on the compatibility of Italian national legislation on the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2008/Case-comments-676/National-rules-Advertising" rel="bookmark"><strong>National rules - Advertising provision</strong>: The ECJ confirms its Cipolla case law and rules that Art. 81 EC, 3(1) (g) and 10 EC combined do not preclude the Belgium law prohibiting advertising of dental care services <em>(Ioannis Doulamis)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2008-03-12T23:40:00Z">13 March 2008</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4774</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-16591 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 13 March 2008, Ioannis Doulamis, case C-446/05 <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by the Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles (Belgium) for a preliminary ruling on the compatibility of national legislation on the conditions governing the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2008/Case-comments-676/Exclusive-service-station" rel="bookmark"><strong>Exclusive service station agreement</strong>: The ECJ Advocate General examines the terms of an exclusive fuel supply contract regarding EU competition rules <em>(Estaciones de Servicio/Tobar e Hijos)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2008-03-12T23:36:00Z">13 March 2008</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4704</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-16596 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi,13 March 2008, CEPSA, Estaciones de Servicio SA v. LV Tobar e Hijos SL, case C-279/06 <br class='autobr' /> In his Opinion on a question referred for a preliminary ruling by the Audiencia Provincial de Madrid (Spain), concerning the terms of a service station contract, (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2008/Cases-comments/Fine-Personal-responsibility-The" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fine - Personal responsibility:</strong> The ECJ interprets the principal of personal responsibility in order to protect the effectiveness of the rules in the sphere of competition <em>(Ente Tabacchi Italiani - ETI)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-12-11T18:03:00Z">11 December 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 5988</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-15254 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 11 December 2007, Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato v. Ente Tabacchi italiani - ETI SpA, case C-280/06 <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Consiglio di Stato (Italy), for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2008/Cases-comments/National-rules-The-Advocate" rel="bookmark"><strong>National rules: </strong>The Advocate General proposes to declare Belgium legislation prohibiting advertising by dentists compatible with the EC Treaty <em>(Ioannis Doulamis)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-11-22T17:45:00Z">22 November 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4043</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-15260 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, Opinion of Advocate General Bot, 22 November 2007, Procureur du Roi v. Ioannis Doulamis, case C-446/05 <br class='autobr' /> In his Opinion on the question referred by the Cour de première instance de Bruxelles (Brussels Court of First Instance) for a preliminary ruling on the compatibility with the provisions (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2008/Cases-comments/Art-65-ECSC-The-CFI-annuls-the" rel="bookmark"><strong>Art. 65 ECSC:</strong> The CFI annuls the Commission’s decision on the ground of absence of competence for having decided on the basis of the expired ECSC Treaty <em>(SP)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-09-25T16:56:00Z">25 September 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4076</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-15258 introduction entry-content"> <p>CFI, 25 October 2007, SP SpA and others v. Commission, Cases T-27/03, T-46/03, T-58/03, T-79/03, T-80/03, T-97/03 and T-98/03. CFI, 25 October 2007, Riva Acciaio SpA v. Commission, case T-45/03 CFI, 25 October 2007, Feralpi Siderurgica SpA v. Commission, case T-77/03 CFI, 25 October 2007, (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2007/case-comments/Restrictive-practices-The-CFI" rel="bookmark"><strong>Restrictive practices</strong>: The CFI confirms the Commission’s decision but reduces the amount of the fine <em>(William Prym GmbH)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-09-12T16:08:00Z">12 September 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4006</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-14368 introduction entry-content"> <p>CFI, 12 September 2007, William Prym GmbH & Co KG, Prym Consumer GmbH & Co KG v. Commission, Case T-30/05 <br class='autobr' /> An action for annulment brought by William Prym and Prym Consumer (hereinafter ’the applicants’) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities. The (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-4-2007/case-comments/Proof-of-agreement-The-CFI" rel="bookmark"><strong>Proof of agreement</strong>: The CFI partially annuls the Commission’s decision and reduces the amount of the fine <em>(Coasts Holdings)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-09-12T16:07:00Z">12 September 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 3991</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-14370 introduction entry-content"> <p>CFI, 12 September 2007, Coasts Holdings Ltd, J&P Coats Ltd v Commission, Case T-36/05 <br class='autobr' /> By a second action for annulment of Commission Decision C (2004) 4221 final of 26 October 2004, this time brought by Coats Holdings Ltd and J&P Coats Ltd (hereinafter ’the applicants’), the Court of (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2007/case-comments/Sanction-Definition-of-turnover" rel="bookmark"><strong>Sanction - Definition of turnover</strong> : The ECJ defines the conditions under which the notion of ’preceding business year’ should be applied <em>(Britannia Alloys)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-06-07T13:14:00Z">7 June 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4366</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-13947 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 7 June 2007, Britannia Alloys & Chemicals Ltd v Commission, "Zinc Phosphate", Case C-76/06 P <br class='autobr' /> Appeal brought by Britannia Alloys against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 November 2005 inCase T 33/02 Britannia Alloys & Chemicals v Commission [2005] ECR II-4973, (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-3-2007/case-comments/Exemption-Commitments-The-CFI" rel="bookmark"><strong>Exemption - Commitments</strong>: The CFI confirms the Commission’s decision granting under conditions an exemption <em>(Grüne Punkt-DSD)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-05-24T13:14:00Z">24 May 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4052</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-13945 introduction entry-content"> <p>CFI, 1st ch., 24 May 2007, Der Grüne Punkt - Duales System Deutschland v. Commission, Case T-289/01 <br class='autobr' /> An action for annulment brought by Der Grüne Punkt - Duales System Deutschland (hereinafter ’the applicant’ or ’DSD’) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities, (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2007/case-comments/Motor-vehicles-The-ECJ-confirms" rel="bookmark"><strong>Motor vehicles</strong>: The ECJ confirms the conditions under which a supplier can terminate a distribution agreement <em>(Toyota Frey Austria)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-01-26T12:43:00Z">26 January 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4943</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-13472 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ (order), 26 January 2007, Auto Peter Petschenig GmbH v. Toyota Frey Austria GmbH, Case C-273/06. <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by the Handelsgericht Wien (Austria) for a preliminary ruling on the consequences of the expiry on 30 September 2002 (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2007/case-comments/Motor-vehicles-The-ECJ-specifies" rel="bookmark"><strong>Motor vehicles</strong>: The ECJ specifies the conditions of validity of express termination clauses <em>(City Motors Groep)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-01-18T13:05:00Z">18 January 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4657</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-13468 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 18 January 2007, City Motors Groep NV, case C-421/05 <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by the Rechtbank van Koophandel te Brussel (Belgium) for a preliminary ruling on the question whether Article 3(6) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002 of (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-2-2007/case-comments/Fines-Bank-garantee-Advocate" rel="bookmark"><strong>Fines - Bank guarantee</strong>: The Advocate General Mengozzi issues an opinion in favour of confirming the <em>Holcim</em> case</a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2007-01-11T09:56:00Z">11 January 2007</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4843</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-13480 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi, 11 January 2007, Holcim v. Commission, case C-282/05 P <br class='autobr' /> Advocate General Mengozzi proposes, as regards the unlawfulness of the Community’s conduct, that the judgment of the Court of First Instance be upheld in so far as, in view of the complex nature (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2007/chroniques/Resale-Price-Maintenance-The-ECJ" rel="bookmark"><strong> Resale Price Maintenance </strong>: The ECJ specifies the conditions under which a supplier can impose an obligation on service-station operators to sell fuel at a specific price <i>(Spanish petrol stations)</i></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2006-12-14T20:27:00Z">14 December 2006</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 5906</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-12847 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 14 December 2006, Confederación Española de Empresarios de Estaciones de Servicio v. Compañía Española de Petróleos SA, Case C-217/05 <br class='autobr' /> Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) from the Tribunal Supremo, the Court of Justice has specified the conditions under which (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2007/chroniques/Austrian-Bank-sector-The-CFI" rel="bookmark"><strong> Austrian Bank sector</strong>: The CFI dismisses the appeals brought against the Club Lombard decision and largely confirms the fines <em>(Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich)</em></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2006-12-13T23:00:00Z">14 December 2006</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 5016</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-12855 introduction entry-content"> <p>CFI, 14 December 2006, Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich AG a.o. v. Commission, Joined Cases T-259/02 to T-264/02 and T-271/02 <br class='autobr' /> In 2002, the European Commission sanctioned a number of Austrian banks, commonly referred to as the "Lombard Club", which had participated in a series of agreements (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2007/chroniques/Arduino-case-law-The-ECJ-confirms" rel="bookmark"><strong>Lawyers’ fees</strong>: The ECJ confirms and further specifies its Arduino case law according to which Articles 10 EC and 81 EC combined do not cover national rules setting professional scales of charges <i>(Frederico Cipolla)</i></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2006-12-06T20:27:00Z">6 December 2006</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 5414</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-12803 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 6 December 2006, Frederico Cipolla v. Rosaria Portolese; Stefano Macrino and Claudia Capodarte v. Roberto Meloni, Joined Cases C-94/04 and C-202/04 <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by the Corte d’appello di Torino (Italy) and the Tribunal di Roma (…)</p> </div> </article></div> <div class="item cite"><article class="entry article hentry"> <span class="authors"><span class="vcard author"><a class="url fn spip_in" href="en/authors/cyril-sarrazin">Cyril Sarrazin</a></span></span> <strong class="h3-like entry-title"><a href="en/review/issues/no-1-2007/chroniques/Motor-vehicle-distribution-The-ECJ" rel="bookmark"><strong> Motor vehicle distribution </strong> : The ECJ specifies the conditions under which a supplier can terminate a distribution agreement <i>(BMW)</i></a></strong> <p class="publication"> <time pubdate="pubdate" datetime="2006-11-30T20:28:00Z">30 November 2006</time> <span class="visites"><i class="picto picto-eye-red"></i> 4431</span> </p> <div class="crayon article-intro-12797 introduction entry-content"> <p>ECJ, 30 November 2006, A. Brünsteiner GmbH and Autohaus Hilgert GmbH v Bayerische Motorenwerke AG (BMW), Joined Cases C-376/05 and C-377/05. <br class='autobr' /> Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) for a preliminary ruling on the (…)</p> </div> </article></div> </div> </div> <div class="content-inner-actions"> <button class="btn-toggle" onclick="return toggle_content_inner.apply(this);"><b class="label_open">Read More </b><span><i class="picto picto-toggle"></i></span></button> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </section> <section class="section section_primary section_books"> <div class="section__container"> <h2 class="content-inner-title"><span>Books</span></h2> <div class="liste articles-livres sm"> <div class="liste-items"> <div class="row"> <a id='pagination_livres_auteur' class='pagination_ancre'></a> <div class="col-sm-6"> <div class="item"> <article class="entry article-livre hentry"> <strong class="h6-like entry-title"><a href="en/all-books/111974" rel="bookmark"> <span class="logo-livre"> <img src="local/cache-vignettes/L60xH90/new_couv_gadc_pac2-f816f.png?1712929332" class='spip_logo front-cover' width='60' height='90' alt="" /> <span class="prix"> <span class="l">Price</span> <span class="i">€65.00</span> </span> </span> <span class="title">Grands arrêts du droit de la concurrence - Pratiques anticoncurrentielles - Volume II : Mise en oeuvre</span></a></strong> <div class="entry-content"> <div class="date"> <span class="l">Date</span> <span class="i">4 January 2023</span> </div> <div class="authors"><span class="l">Author(s):</span> <span class="i">Laurence Idot (dir.)</span></div> <div class="prix"> <span class="l">Price</span> <span class="i">€65.00</span> </div> </div> <a href="en/all-books/111974" class="more">Read online <i class="picto picto-toggle"></i></a> </article> </div> </div> <div class="col-sm-6"> <div class="item"> <article class="entry article-livre hentry"> <strong class="h6-like entry-title"><a href="en/all-books/111973" rel="bookmark"> <span class="logo-livre"> <img src="local/cache-vignettes/L60xH90/new_couv_gadc_pac1-af1b2.png?1712928400" class='spip_logo front-cover' width='60' height='90' alt="" /> <span class="prix"> <span class="l">Price</span> <span class="i">€65.00</span> </span> </span> <span class="title">Grands arrêts du droit de la concurrence - Pratiques anticoncurrentielles - Volume I : Règles de fond</span></a></strong> <div class="entry-content"> <div class="date"> <span class="l">Date</span> <span class="i">4 January 2023</span> </div> <div class="authors"><span class="l">Author(s):</span> <span class="i">Laurence Idot (dir.)</span></div> <div class="prix"> <span class="l">Price</span> <span class="i">€65.00</span> </div> </div> <a href="en/all-books/111973" class="more">Read online <i class="picto picto-toggle"></i></a> </article> </div> </div> </div><div class="row"> </div> </div> </div> </div> </section> <section class="section section_primary section_stats" id="statistiques"> <div class="section__container"> <h2 class="content-inner-title"><span>Statistics</span></h2> <div class="row statistiques-auteur"> <div class="col-sm-8 col-sm-offset-2 col-md-6 col-md-offset-3"> <div class="col-xs-4"> <span class="stat"> <img src='squelettes/img/stat-big-eye.png?1549956136' alt='' width='25' height='17' /><br/> <em>148812</em> </span> <strong class="stat-label">Total visits</strong> </div> <div class="col-xs-4"> <span class="stat"> <img src='squelettes/img/stat-big-eye.png?1549956136' alt='' width='25' height='17' /><br/> <em>1907.8</em> </span> <strong class="stat-label">Number of readings per contribution</strong> </div> <div class="col-xs-4"> <span class="stat"> <img src='squelettes/img/stat-pie.png?1549956136' alt='' width='21' height='21' /><br/> <em>78</em> </span> <strong class="stat-label">Number of contributions</strong> </div> <div class="separateur"> <span class="stat"> <img src='squelettes/img/stat-podium.png?1549956136' alt='' width='39' height='22' /><br/> <em>Author's ranking</em> </span> </div> <div class="col-xs-4"> <div class="stat-number"> <em>143<sup>th</sup></em> </div> <strong class="stat-label">In number of contributions</strong> </div> <div class="col-xs-4"> <div class="stat-number"> <em>43<sup>th</sup></em> </div> <strong class="stat-label">In number of visits</strong> </div> <div class="col-xs-4"> <div class="stat-number"> <em>1554<sup>th</sup></em> </div> <strong class="stat-label">In average number of visits</strong> </div> </div> </div> </div> </section> </div> <script type="text/javascript"> jQuery(function() { // selectionner tous les liens vers des images var medias = jQuery('.collection-views').find('.link-media').not('.hasbox'); active_collection_popin(medias); }); onAjaxLoad(function() { var medias = jQuery('.link-media',this).not('.hasbox'); active_collection_popin(medias); }); </script> </main> <aside class="aside secondary" id="aside"> </aside> <aside class="extra secondary" id="extra"> </aside> </div> </div> <footer class="banner-bottom" id="banner-bottom"> <div class="container"> </div> </footer> </div> <footer class="footer" id="footer" role="contentinfo"> <div class="container"> <div class="row"> <div class="col-sm-4 col-xs-3"> <div class="row"> <div class="col-sm-6 col-md-4"> <div class="adresse small"> <img src='squelettes/img/logo/concurrences-crop.svg?1704296160' alt='Concurrences' class='logo-concurrences' width='1680' height='408' /> <img src='squelettes/img/logo/20ans/20ans-crop.svg?1704296160' alt='Concurrences' class='logo-20ans' width='617' height='439' /> </div> </div> <div class="col-sm-6 col-md-8"> <div class="adresse small"> <p>19 avenue Jean Aicard<br class='autobr' /> 75011 Paris, France </p> <p>106 West 32nd Street, Suite 149<br class='autobr' /> New York, NY, 10001, USA </p> <p>Camden Gateway, 349 Royal College St,<br class='autobr' /> London NW1 9QS, UK </p> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="col-sm-2 col-xs-3 col-sm-offset-1"> <div class="menu small"> <div class="row"> <div class="col-sm-6"> <ul class="menu-liste menu-items nav nav-list"> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item_menu"> <a href="en/bulletin/" class="menu-items__lien">Bulletin</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item_menu"> <a href="en/review/" class="menu-items__lien">Review</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item_menu"> <a href="en/events/" class="menu-items__lien">Events</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique"> <a href="en/all-books/" class="menu-items__lien">Books</a> </li> </ul></div><div class="col-sm-6"><ul class="menu-liste menu-items nav nav-list"> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item_badge"> <a href="en/dictionary/" class="menu-items__lien">Dictionary <small>Free</small></a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_article"> <a href="en/podcasts" class="menu-items__lien">Podcasts</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_lien"> <a href="https://awards.concurrences.com" class="menu-items__lien">Awards</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_rubrique item-primary"> <a href="en/abonnements/" class="menu-items__lien">Subscriptions</a> </li> </ul> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div class="col-sm-4 col-xs-6 col-sm-offset-1"> <div class="row"> <div class="col-xs-6 w450"> <div class="links small"> <ul class="menu-liste menu-items nav" data-depth="0"> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_page-speciale plan"> <a href="en/page/sitemap/" class="menu-items__lien">Site map</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_article"> <a href="en/institute" class="menu-items__lien">Concurrences</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_article"> <a href="en/terms-of-use-63" class="menu-items__lien">Terms of Use</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_article"> <a href="en/terms-of-sale" class="menu-items__lien">Terms of Sale</a> </li> <li class="menu-entree item menu-items__item menu-items__item_objet menu-items__item_article"> <a href="en/write-for-concurrences-review" class="menu-items__lien">Publish</a> </li> </ul> </div> </div> <div class="col-xs-6 w450"> <div class="tools small"> <ul class="nav nav-list"> <li><a href="en/page/subscriptions/"><i class="picto picto-footer-abonnements"></i> Subscriptions</a></li> <li><a href="en/page/contact/" class="popin"><i class="picto picto-footer-contact"></i> Contact</a></li> <li> <a href="en/page/subscribe/"><i class="picto picto-footer-newsletter"></i> Newsletter</a> </li> <li><a href="https://calendly.com/concurrences/30min" rel="external" target="blank">Request a demo</a></li> </ul> <span class="social social_links"> <a class="social__icon social__icon_twitter" href="https://twitter.com/CompetitionLaws" title="Visit our Twitter page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_twitter-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Twitter (opens a new window)</span> </a> <a class="social__icon social__icon_linkedin" href="https://www.linkedin.com/company/institute-of-competition-law-icl-institut-de-droit-de-la-concurrence-idc-" title="Visit our Linkedin page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_linkedin-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Linkedin (opens a new window)</span> </a> <a class="social__icon social__icon_facebook" href="https://www.facebook.com/concurrences.review/" title="Visit our Facebook page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_facebook-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Facebook (opens a new window)</span> </a> <a class="social__icon social__icon_instagram" href="https://www.instagram.com/concurrences_review/" title="Visit our Instagram page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_instagram-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Instagram (opens a new window)</span> </a> <a class="social__icon social__icon_youtube" href="https://www.youtube.com/c/ConcurrencesReview" title="Visit our Youtube page" target="_blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer"> <em class="idc-icon idc-icon_youtube-fill" aria-hidden></em> <span class="visually-hidden">Youtube (opens a new window)</span> </a> </span> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </footer> </div>  <script type="text/javascript"> (function() { var w=window,d=document,r="",g=d.createElement('script'),s=d.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; try{r=w.top.document.referrer}catch(Y){if(w.parent){try{r=w.parent.document.referrer}catch(X){r=""}}}if(r===""){r=d.referrer} g.type='text/javascript';g.defer=true;g.async=true;g.src="//www.concurrences.com/spip.php?action=statsjs&c=YToxOntzOjk6ImlkX2F1dGV1ciI7czozOiI0NTEiO30="+"&r="+btoa(r);s.parentNode.insertBefore(g,s); })(); </script></body></html>