Search results - Concurrences

3 Dec 2020 B

EU Competition Law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights: An overview of EU and national case law

Jacquelyn MacLennan, Bram Vereecken, Aron Senoner • ECHR

Fundamental rights are an integral element of the rule of the law, and any system which purports to respect the rule of law must be seen to respect the fundamental rights of the individuals subject to it. At this particular moment, with the COVID-19 pandemic, fundamental rights are an issue of (...)

1 Sep 2020 R

Untangling the inextricable: The notion of “same offence” in EU competition law

Pierpaolo Rossi, Valentina Sansonetti • N° 3-2020 • pp. 59-68

In the EU, the ne bis in idem principle restricts the ability of enforcement authorities to prosecute or punish the same defendant for the same criminal offence more than once. That protection applies to competition fines due to its punitive and deterrent nature and its degree of severity. (...)

27 Jul 2020 B

The Spanish High Court rejects the appeal brought by a consultancy firm fined for acting as a facilitator in a car cartel (ANT)

Rafael Baena, Pablo Velasco • July 2020

In 2015, the Spanish Competition Authority ("CNMC") sanctioned a cartel of Land Rover dealers, and found that a consultancy firm, ANT Servicalidad, was also liable for the conduct as it acted as a facilitator of the cartel. In a recent judgment, the Spanish High Court rejected the appeal (...)

14 May 2020 B

The Ankara Regional Administrative Court annuls the Turkish Competition Authority’s decision that concluded a violation but no fine because the same action and subject had already previously been fined (Mey İçki)

Bahadır Balkı, Mustafa Ayna, Özlem Başıböyük • May 2020

The Regional Administrative Court Found the Turkish Competition Authority’s Decision concerning Mey İçki Unlawful: Abuse of the Dominance Should Be Evaluated Separately in terms of Each Product Market!* Introduction The Ankara Regional Administrative Court’s 8th Administrative Chamber (“Regional (...)

2 Apr 2020 B

The Austrian Supreme Cartel Court requests preliminary ruling from the EU Court of Justice concerning territorial agreements in connection with the sale of industrial sugar (Zuckercartell)

Austrian Competition Authority • April 2020

Supreme Cartel Court submits questions to European Court of Justice in the appeals procedure concerning territorial agreements in connection with the sale of industrial sugar* In the cartel case on territorial agreements in connection with the sale of industrial sugar, Vienna Higher Regional (...)

4 Mar 2020 R

Concurrent offenses: The Court of Justice of the European Union confirms the possibility for the European Commission to simultaneously impose on the same company two separate fines for failure to notify a transaction and for implementing that transaction prior to clearance (Mowi)

Olivier Billard, Guillaume Fabre, Solène Hamon • N° 2-2020 • pp. 118-121

The European Court of Justice ruling of 4 March 2020 marks the end of the Marine Harvest saga, namely the acquisition by Norwegian salmon producer and processor Marine Harvest (now Mowi ASA) of its competitor Morpol. On 18 December 2012, Marine Harvest acquired 48.5% of Morpol’s capital from (...)

4 Mar 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice upholds the EU Commission’s fines to a fish farmer and processor company for infringing merger control rules (Marine Harvest)

Mark Jones, Christopher Peacock • March 2020

Norwegian salmon farmer Marine Harvest has been unsuccessful in its appeal to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding substantial and separate fines imposed on it by the European Commission for both failing to notify a merger and for ’jumping the gun’ in implementing the (...)

4 Mar 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice upholds a gun jumping fine on a sea food company (Marine harvest)

Pedro Callol, Manuel Canadas Bouwen, Jorge Manzarbeitia, Enrique Fayos, Laura Moya • March 2020

On 14 December 2012, Marine Harvest entered into a share purchase agreement under which it acquired a 48.5% stake in one of its competitors, Morpol. The transaction, which was not notified to the Commission, was completed on 18 December 2012. In 2013, Marine Harvest made a mandatory public (...)

2 Mar 2020 B

The Turkish Competition Authority opens an investigation against an undertaking operating in the automotive sector in order to re-evaluate its previous decision since it was annulled by the 13th Chamber of Council of States (SCT)

Bahadır Balkı, Mustafa Ayna, Özlem Başıböyük • March 2020

The Undertakings Operating in the Automotive Sector under the Review of the TCA Once Again* Introduction In the previous days, the Turkish Competition Authority (“TCA”) resolved under its decision dated 26.03.2020 and numbered 20-16/234-M to open an investigation against the undertaking (...)

1 Feb 2020 R

EU: The criminalisation of competition law breaches - Another attempt to square the circle?

Kane Abry-Diaw de Baye • N° 1-2020

This article explores the mechanisms that some Member States of the European Union have put in place to criminalise the enforcement of competition law. It highlights the rationale behind the criminalisation of competition law breaches in those few European countries that have chosen to (...)

24 Sep 2019 R

Equal treatment: The General Court of the European Union dismisses the new appeal brought by an undertaking fined for its participation in the paper cartel against the decision ’re-adopted’ by the European Commission, since it does not infringe any of the fundamental principles of procedure (Printeos)

Anne-Sophie Choné-Grimaldi • N° 1-2020 • pp. 71-73

The envelope cartel has given rise to numerous decisions by different European and national authorities and courts. The decision adopted on 10 December 2014 by the European Commission, which sanctioned various envelope manufacturers for their participation in various cartel activities, is at (...)

4 Sep 2019 eB

Grands arrêts du droit de la concurrence - Volume IV 1.2 Les pouvoirs des autorités de régulation

72 2 Les pouvoirs des autorités de régulation 2.1 Décision CE, 2 avril 2010, Société Mediaserv, n°319816 Le Conseil d'État reconnaît à l'ARCEP le droit d'imposer l'itinérance sur les fréquences exploitées en 2 G au bénéfice de nouveaux entrants qui ne disposent d'autorisation que dans la bande 2,1 GHz, (...)

4 Sep 2019 eB

Grands arrêts du droit de la concurrence - Volume IV Chapitre 1 Principes généraux
1.1 La nature des autorités de régulation

Alexandre Martin, Christophe Lemaire, Denis Lescop, Emily Xueref-Poviac, Emmanuel Guillaume, Guillaume Léonard, Helene Lallemand, Jean Cattan, Jean-Paul Tran Thiet, Jean-Philippe Kovar, Joelle Adda, Julie Rondu, Laetitia Ghebali, Martine Lombard, Mélodie Lenglart, Michaël Perche, Orion Berg, Pierre-Edouard Pivois, Roman Roussel, Sebastien Martin, Simon Daboussy, Sylvain Justier, Vincent Jaunet

Chapitre 1 prinCipes généraux 14 1 l a nature des autorités de régulation 1.1 r?gulation et concurrence Ce, 28 sept. 2018, eveler, n? 411454 Le Conseil d'État considère, au visa de l'article L. 341-3 du Code de l'énergie, que la fixation des tarifs des prestations annexes par la Commission de régulation (...)

3 Apr 2019 R

Fine: The Court of Justice of the European Union rules that the principle ne bis in idem does not preclude a competition authority from imposing on an undertaking, in the context of the same decision, a fine for infringement of national competition law and a fine for abuse of dominance (Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie / Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów)

Alain Ronzano • N° 3-2019

The Court of Justice of the European Union holds that the ne bis in idem principle does not preclude a competition authority from imposing on an undertaking, in a single decision, a fine for infringement of national competition law and a fine for infringement of Article 82 EC, provided that, (...)

3 Apr 2019 R

Rights of defence: The Court of Justice of the European Union rules that the ne bis in idem principle does not apply to a decision of a national competition authority imposing two fines through the parallel application of national and Union law (Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie)

Alexandre Lacresse, Barbara Monti • N° 3-2019 • pp. 153-154

At the beginning of this preliminary ruling case, a Polish company was sanctioned by the national competition authority for having abused its dominant position on the market for group life insurance, both under national law for the period 2001-2007 and under EU competition rules, but only for (...)

21 Jun 2018 B

The Moldovan Competition Authority applies the non bis in idem principle in the investigation of abuse of dominance in the electricity market (Gas Natural Fenosa Furnizare)

Alexandr Svetlicinii • June 2018

On 21 June 2018 the Competition Council of the Republic of Moldova (CC) has concluded its investigation into the alleged abuse of dominant position in the form of refusal to deal on the part of the electricity supplier Gas Natural Fenosa Furnizare Energie SRL. Based on the principle of ne bis (...)

14 Jun 2018 B

The Moldovan Competition Authority prosecutes the company managing a bus terminal for imposing unfair trading conditions on the passenger bus operators (Telautogar)

Alexandr Svetlicinii • June 2018

On 14 June 2018, the Competition Council of the Republic of Moldova (CC) prosecuted the bus terminal operator Telautogar SRL for the abuse of dominant position in the form of imposing unfair trading terms on passenger bus operators. Telautogar SRL was the company managing the bus terminal in (...)

26 Oct 2017 R

Gun jumping: The General Court of the European Union upholds a Commission decision imposing a EUR 20 million fine on a Norwegian company for implementing a concentration without prior notification or authorisation (Marine Harvest)

Jean-François Bellis, Valérie Lefever • N° 1-2018 • pp. 119-120

In a judgment of October 26, 2017, the European Court of First Instance confirmed the European Commission’s decision of July 23, 2014 to impose a fine of €20 million on the Norwegian fish farming company Marine Harvest for having acquired the Norwegian salmon producer Morpol in December 2012 (...)

9 Jan 2017 B

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal rejects an application for complete stay of penalty in a cement cartel case (Binani Cement / Builders’ Association of India)

Man Mohan Sharma • January 2017

Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) rejects the application of Binani Cement for complete stay of penalty in Cement Cartel appeals* COMPAT by its order dated January 9, 2017 has rejected the application of Binani Cement for complete stay of penalty while its appeal against the penalty (...)

27 Oct 2015 B

The OECD holds a roundtable on cartels involving intermediate goods

OECD • October 2015

Executive summary, by the Secretariat * Considering the discussion at the roundtable on “Cartels Involving Intermediate Goods”, held by Working Party No.3 on Co-operation and Enforcement on 27 October 2015, the Secretariat’s background paper and the delegates’ written submissions and (...)

9 Jul 2015 B

The EU Court of Justice confirms potential of high cartel fines for vertically integrated multinational companies (InnoLux)

Peter Citron • July 2015

EU judgment confirms potential of high cartel fines for vertically integrated multinational companies* On 9 July 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) issued an important judgment concerning the basis on which cartel fines by the European Commission should be calculated for (...)

12 May 2015 R

Margin squeeze: The French Supreme Judiciary Court rejects the appeal of an internet access and data transport company and confirms the commitments imposed on the French incumbent telecom operator (Cogent/Orange)

Alain Ronzano • N° 3-2015

Cass. com, 12 May 2015, Appeal No. 14-10.792 (Cogent/Orange) By judgment of 12 May 2015the Commercial Chamber of the Court of Cassation dismissed the appeal against the Paris Court of Appeal’s ruling of 19 December 2013.which had dismissed the appeals against Decision No 12-D-18. relating to (...)

17 Apr 2015 B

The Swedish Market Court finds that the principle of ne bis in idem does not hinder the Court from imposing fines on an undertaking, despite the fact that the company has already been subject to a previous court judgment to put an end to the company’s abusive practice (Swedavia)

Viktor Wahlqvist • April 2015

The Swedish Market Court (Sw. Marknadsdomstolen) found, on 17 April 2015, that the principle of ne bis in idem did not hinder the Swedish Competition Authority from imposing fines on the undertaking Swedavia AB (“Swedavia”) for abusing its dominant position, despite the fact that the company had (...)

11 Mar 2015 B

The Lisbon Appeal Court confirms 2.7 million € fine for discriminatory pricing under Art. 102 national equivalent, and revolutionizes access to information for third parties (Sport TV)

Miguel Sousa Ferro • March 2015

On 11 March 2015, the Lisbon Appeal Court (LAC) rejected all arguments put forward by the appellant and confirmed the judgment of the Competition, Regulation and Supervision Court (CSRC) of 4 June 2014, which had, in turn, confirmed (with a reduction of the fine, from 3.7 to 2.7 million EUR) (...)

1 Dec 2014 R

Competition journals: July - Sept. 2014

Alain Ronzano, Bastien Thomas, Christelle Adjémian, Emmanuel Frot, Mathilde Brabant • N° 4-2014 • pp. 289-292

This section of the review Concurrences selects articles and working papers on themes related to competition laws and economics, mainly, but not only, in the English and French languages. This compilation does not attempt to be exhaustive but rather a survey on themes important in the area. The (...)

1 Dec 2014 R

Interplay between public and private enforcement: Uniform implementation of EU competition law and the principle of ne bis in idem (10 ans d’application du règlement 1/2003 et de la loi luxembourgeoise relative à la concurrence, Luxembourg-Kirchberg, 6 juin 2014)

Caroline Naômé, Jacques Steenbergen, Laurence Idot • N° 4-2014 • pp. 54-74

Two themes were covered in the roundtable. The principle of ne bis in idem concerns the interplay between different procedures of sanctions of a public nature. The interplay between public and private enforcement has been considered in the draft damages directive and in the French case-law, (...)

25 Nov 2014 R

Inspection : The General Court of the European Union validates a Commission inspection decision adopted following the closing of national proceedings brought against the same company over similar alleged infringements (Orange)

Pascal Cardonnel • N° 1-2015 • pp. 171-173

In the summer of 2013, the Commission carried out an inspection visit to Orange’s premises in France. This visit covered 4 sites, 18 offices and lasted 4 days, during which 11 computers, 5 smartphones, heard a witness, copied several hard disks and analysed 34 e-mails. For a cartel, such an (...)

1 May 2014 R

Competition journals: Jan. - March 2014

Alain Ronzano, Bastien Thomas, Christelle Adjémian, Emmanuel Frot, Mathilde Brabant • N° 2-2014 • pp. 253-257

This section of the review Concurrences selects articles and working papers on themes related to competition laws and economics, mainly, but not only, in the English and French languages. This compilation does not attempt to be exhaustive but rather a survey on themes important in the area. The (...)

4 Mar 2014 R

Financial regulation : The European Court of Human Right interprets principles of impartiality and non bis in idem (Grande Stevens/Italy)

Francesco Martucci • N° 1-2015 • pp. 204-205

On 18 December 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its opinion on the accession of the Union to the European Convention on Human Rights (CJ, Plenary Assembly, 18 December 2014, Opinion 2/2013). It declared the draft accession agreement incompatible with Union law. This (...)

30 Jan 2014 R

Complex anticompetitive agreement: The Paris court of appeal rejects action against the decision of the French Competition Authority fining the detergent cartel (Unilever, Procter & Gamble, Henkel, Colgate Palmolive)

Martine Behar-Touchais • N° 2-2014 • pp. 82-85

It will be recalled that by Decision No. 11-D-17 of 8 December 2011367.9 million, the French Competition Authority had sanctioned a cartel between the four laundry detergent manufacturers active in France (Unilever, Procter & Gamble, Henkel and Colgate Palmolive) in the amount of The (...)

30 Jan 2014 B

The Paris Court of Appeal dismisses an appeal brought by the French Competition Authority and rejects the claim that the sanction violated the prohibition on double jeopardy (Unilever / Henkel / Procter & Gamble / Colgate Palmolive)

Arnaud Sanz, Tien Hua • January 2014

On 30 January 2014, the Paris Court of Appeal (Court of Appeal) dismissed the appeals brought against the decision of the French Competition Authority (FCA) in the consumer detergents sector, by confirming that the infringements sanctioned by the European Commission (Commission) and the FCA (...)

20 Jan 2014 B

The Swedish Competition Authority seeks to fine an undertaking after it was found to abuse its dominant position in a successful private antitrust action (Swedavia)

Grant McKelvey • January 2014

Follow-on damages inverted* Swedavia and the Swedish Competition Authority Competition lawyers in Europe are well acquainted with the steady rise of follow-on damages actions, whereby consumers harmed by a competition infringement can “piggyback” on an authority infringement decision and seek (...)

13 Jan 2014 B

The Stockholm City Court rejects petition for dismissing an application for competition damages subsequent to the issue of an injunction order giving rise to a liability to pay penalties in case of non-compliance (Swedavia)

Swedish Competition Authority • January 2014

The City Court rules that there are no formal obstacles to charging Swedavia for competition damages* The Swedish Competition Authority may bring an action before the court to sue for competition damages even where the behaviour that forms the basis of the claim has already been forbidden by (...)

13 Jan 2014 B

The Stockholm City Court rules that the prohibition against double jeopardy does not bar subsequent administrative proceedings in a case of abuse of dominance where previous civil proceedings led to an injunction order under penalty of a fine (Swedavia)

Emanuela Matei • January 2014

Admissibility of an action for imposing a competition fine brought after the Market Court ordered injunction under penalty of a fine in related civil proceedings. Exploitative abuse of dominance. Ne bis in idem Background Swedavia is a state-owned company in charge with the administration of (...)

24 Oct 2013 B

The EU Court of Justice rules in favour of the appellant and allows the action for annulment against the Commission decision to reopen an inquiry on the alleged incompatibility of a state aid measure (Deutsche Post)

Albert Sánchez Graells • October 2013

"Ne bis in idem" in State aid control? CJEU quashes Deutsche Post decision (C-77/12 P)* In its Judgment of 24 October 2013 in case C-77/12 P Deutsche Post v Commission, the Court of Justice of the EU quashed a Judgment of the General Court (T-421/07) and (indirectly) questioned a decision (...)

13 Mar 2013 B

The Athens Administrative Court of Appeal upholds the Competition Authority’s decision in finding exclusionary practices in the market for salty snack products (Tasty Foods)

Dimitrios-Panagiotis Tzakas • March 2013

Introduction On 13 March 2013, the Athens Administrative Court of Appeal (Dioikitiko Efeteio Athinon, hereafter: the Court) delivered Ruling No 869/2013 upholding Decision No 520/VI/2011 of the Hellenic Competition Commission (Elliniki Epitropi Antagonismou, hereafter: HCC). The contested (...)

1 Feb 2013 R

Competition Journals : Oct. - Dec. 2012

Alain Ronzano, Bastien Thomas, Christelle Adjémian, Emmanuel Frot • N° 1-2013 • pp. 260-264

1. General - Scope of application Forum-shopping and law-shopping strategies in competition law: applications to litigation between AMD and Intel (2000-2010), F. Marty (OFCE Working Paper, 27, 2012) F. Marty offers a reading of the litigation between AMD and Intel through arbitration between (...)

29 Jan 2013 B

The Chilean Competition Tribunal condemns trade association for collusion (ACHAP)

Javier Tapia • January 2013

On 29th January 2013, the Chilean Competition Tribunal (‘TDLC’) issued its judgment in the ACHAP case (Sentence 128/2013). The TDLC partially accepted the complaint filed by the competition agency (the “FNE”) against the local Advertising Agencies Trade Association (the “ACHAP”, for its Spanish (...)

1 Sep 2012 R

Developments in and around the European Competition Network and cooperation in competition enforcement in the EU: An update

Ailsa Sinclair, Dorothe Dalheimer, Evelyne Rikkers, Ingrid Breit, Jeroen Capiau, Vita Juknevičiūtė • N° 3-2012 • pp. 78-87

Depuis 2004, les règles de concurrence de l’Union Européenne occupent une place centrale dans la pratique des autorités de concurrence des Etats membres. De la même manière, ces autorités, ainsi que les cours et tribunaux qui exercent un contrôle juridictionnel sur leur action, contribuent de plus en (...)

7 Jun 2012 R

Search engine: The Tribunal de commerce of Paris stays the proceedings in a case opposing two search engines while waiting for the Commission to give its opinion (1plusV / Google)

Alain Ronzano • N° 3-2012

In a ruling handed down on 7 June 2012, the Paris Commercial Court (3rd Chamber) has decided to stay the proceedings in the case between the publisher of the thematic search engines, 1plusV, to Google and this, while waiting for the The Commission shall rule on identical facts which have been (...)

6 Mar 2012 R

Joint control – Parental liability: The General Court confirms most of the Commission’s decision sanctioning Danish and Finnish companies in the plastic industrial bags cartel, but limits the parent companies’ liability period in a case of joint control, and reduces slightly the corresponding fines (UPM-Kymmene, FLS Plast and FLSmidth)

Michel Debroux • N° 2-2012 • pp. 51-52

Trib. EU, 6 March 2012, UPM-Kymmene v. Commission, Case T-53/06, "Industrial plastic bags". Trib. EU, 6 March 2012, FLS Plast v. Commission, Case T-64/06, "Industrial plastic bags". Trib. EU, 6 March 2012, FLSmidth v Commission, Case T-65/06, "Industrial plastic bags". In this case of (...)

14 Feb 2012 B

The EU Court of Justice renders a judgment on a Czech preliminary reference in the gas-insulated switchgear case (Toshiba)

Jindrich Kloub • February 2012

Upcoming judgment in case C-17/10 Toshiba and Others to shed light on the question of parallel proceedings within the ECN* On 14 February, the Court of Justice will deliver a ruling on a preliminary reference by a Czech Regional Court in Brno, which is likely to provide welcome guidance on the (...)

14 Feb 2012 B

The EU Court of Justice confirms the power of the Czech Competition Authority to punish a pre-EU-accession cartel on the basis of Art. 101 TFEU (Toshiba)

Karel Svoboda • February 2012

Proceedings before the Commission On 2 August 2006, the European Commission (the “Commission”) initiated proceedings regarding an alleged breach of competition rules by numerous companies producing gas insulated switchgear (“GIS”) who entered into a worldwide bid-rigging agreement. The cartel (...)

14 Feb 2012 R

European competition network: The Court of Justice does not give up the criteria of the unity of the legal interest protected for the application of the ne bis in idem principle in competition cases (Toshiba Corporation)

Alexandre Lacresse • N° 2-2012 • pp. 130-132

CJEU, 14 February 2012, Toshiba Corporation and Others, Case C-17/10 Highly anticipated since the delivery of Advocate General Kokott’s Opinion on 8 September 2011, the Court’s judgment in this case will disappoint those who had hoped for a development in its case-law on the application of the (...)

14 Feb 2012 B

The EU Court of Justice rules on parallel enforcement under Regulation 1/2003 while declining to redefine ne bis in idem within the ECN (Toshiba)

Anton Dinev • February 2012

I. Introduction 1.Against most expectations, the particularly awaited judgment of the EU Court of Justice (ECJ) in Toshiba, delivered in Grand Chamber on 14 February 2012 , did not provide a landmark ruling on the scope of the ne bis in idem principle (the European double jeopardy clause) in (...)

14 Feb 2012 R

Competence of national authorities: The EU Court of Justice clarifies the scope of the divestment of national authorities adopted pursuant to article 11§6 of Regulation n°1/2003 (Toshiba)

Alain Ronzano • N° 2-2012

In a Grand Chamber Judgment delivered today, 14 February 2012, the The Court of the European Union, responding to a request for a decision, has come to say Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Krajský soud v Brně - Brno Regional Court in the Czech Republic -, that the Czech competition (...)

14 Feb 2012 B

The EU Court of Justice rules on the division of competencies between the national and the supranational enforcers of competition law in relation to a worldwide cartel on the market for gas insulated switchgear (Toshiba)

Laurens Ankersmit • February 2012

Delimitation of jurisdiction in competition law* What happens to the allocation of respective competences of the Commission and national competition authorities if an international cartel is implemented both in the EU and the Czech Republic before accession to the EU but action is taken after (...)

8 Sep 2011 B

The EU Court of Justice Advocate General Kokott renders her opinion in the Czech gas insulated switchgear case holding that the principle ne bis in idem does not preclude National Competition Authority’s from prosecuting the same cartel with respect to different territories or periods (Toshiba)

Damien Gerard • September 2011

AG Kokott’s Opinion in Toshiba: framing the application of the ne bis in idem principle in EU competition law enforcement* One of the main concerns raised by the decentralization of EU competition law enforcement related to the risk of different competition authorities prosecuting and (...)

7 Jul 2011 B

The Serbian Administrative Court upholds the decision of the National Competition Authority sanctioning professional association for the adoption of the minimum prices to be charged by its members (Veterinary Chamber of Serbia)

Alexandr Svetlicinii • July 2011

On 7 July 2011 the Administrative Court has upheld the infringement decision of the Serbian Competition Authority (KZK) sanctioning the Veterinary Chamber of Serbia (VKS) for adopting minimum prices to be charged by its members. The judgment has reaffirmed the competence of the KZK to impose (...)

3 May 2011 R

EC Regulation n° 1/2003 – Article 5: The Court of Justice denies to the NCAs the right to adopt decisions “stating that a practice does not restrict competition” (Tele2 Polska)

Christophe Lemaire • N° 3-2011 • pp. 173-177

CJEU, 3 May 2011, Tele2 Polska, Case C-375/09 The Court of Justice of the European Union has so far had very few opportunities to rule on the provisions of Regulation 1/2003 since its entry into force on 1 May 2004. For that reason alone, the judgment of 3 May 2011, delivered in the Grand (...)

total	92
total_found	92
time	0.185

Your search returned 92 results Ne bis in idem

Debug

Métas associées