CASE COMMENTS: ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES - EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION - MARKET SHARING - PROCEDURAL AUTONOMY OF NATIONAL COMPETITION AUTHORITIES

Procedural autonomy : The Competition Council overturns the principle of procedural autonomy of the judgment Pharmalab (CRA, Signeurop, Unidoc, Somaro, Viamark, SAR)

KEYWORDS
References

Conseil de la concurrence, 6 décembre 2005, n°05-D-67, relative aux

pratiques mises en oeuvre sur le marché de la signalisation routière

horizontale dans les régions de Picardie et du Nord-Pas de Calais

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. See Decision No. 05-D-67 of 6 December 2005 on the practices implemented in the

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.

 

This document is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties. Non-authorised use of this document constitutes a violation of the publisher's rights and may be punished by up to 3 years imprisonment and up to a € 300 000 fine (Art. L 335-2 Code de la Propriété Intellectuelle). Personal use of this document is authorised within the limits of Art. L 122-5 CPI and DRM protection.

PDF Version

Author

  • L’actu-concurrence (Paris)
    France 4525 contributions 1119491 visits

Quotation

Alain Ronzano, Procedural autonomy : The Competition Council overturns the principle of procedural autonomy of the judgment Pharmalab (CRA, Signeurop, Unidoc, Somaro, Viamark, SAR), 6 December 2005, Concurrences N° 1-2006, Art. N° 55040, www.concurrences.com

Visites 83

All reviews