Background The present case involves "follow on" claims for compensation in respect of damage suffered as a result of the vitamins cartel, which was famously subject to a Commission decision in 2001 [1]. The Commission found that notwithstanding the number of producers involved in eight distinct cartels, the variation in the participation in the meetings and the diversity of their product ranges, the collusive arrangements in question were to be considered together as one cartel. The cartel involved the fixing of prices, the allocation of sales quotas, the agreement on and implementation of price increases and the issuing of price announcements. A sophisticated monitoring system was also put in place to ensure full adherence with the collusive arrangements. These activities had far
Share on
|
|
The UK High Court rules that restitution damages are not an available remedy in antitrust cases, nor will an account of a defendant’s profits be appropriate (Devenish / Sanofi-Aventis)
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers
Already Subscribed? Sign-in
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.
Read one article for free
Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.
