CASE COMMENTS: ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES - ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS - PUBLIC DISTANCIATION

Attendance at meetings: The Court of First Instance of the European Union rules that an operator’s failure to take a clear position at a meeting organized with a view to setting up anticompetitive practices can be considered as taking part in the violation (Westfalen Gassen Nederland)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Court of First Instance of the European Communities, 5 December 2006, Case T-303/02, Westfalen Gassen Nederland BV v. Commission Facts In 2002, the Commission condemned several companies operating in the industrial and medical gases sector in the Netherlands for anti-competitive cartels. In particular, these operators were accused of agreeing on price [1]increases at meetings. One of them brought an action before the Court of First Instance (CFI). He argued that, in view of his behaviour at the meetings, he could not be considered to have agreed to participate in the practices in question. The Court of First Instance dismisses the action. Decision "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.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • University of Montpellier

Quotation

Didier Ferrier, Attendance at meetings: The Court of First Instance of the European Union rules that an operator’s failure to take a clear position at a meeting organized with a view to setting up anticompetitive practices can be considered as taking part in the violation (Westfalen Gassen Nederland), 5 December 2006, Concurrences N° 1-2007, Art. N° 27435, www.concurrences.com

Visites 1796

All reviews