CASE COMMENTS : ANTICOMPETITIVE AGREEMENT – ARTICLE 101 TFEU – SERVICES –SINGLE AND CONTINUOUS INFRINGEMENT – FAILURE TO PROVE THAT AN UNDERTAKING PARTY TO AN INDIVIDUAL AGREEMENT WAS AWARE OF THE OTHER INDIVIDUAL AGREEMENTS – ANNULMENT IN WHOLE OR IN PART

Single and continuous infringement: The Court of Justice welcomes the appeal lodged by the Commission and reduces a fine to the amount of EUR 35 000 (Verhuizingen Coppens)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. CJEU, 6 December 2012, C-441/11 P, Commission v Verhuizingen Coppens NV 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 published in the ECR), the Court seeks the annulment of the judgment of the Court of First Instance. In essence, the Court found that, by annulling Commission Decision C(2008) 926 final of 11 March 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article [81 EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.543 - International Removal Services) in its entirety, whereas partial

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

  • European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)

Quotation

Cyril Sarrazin, Single and continuous infringement: The Court of Justice welcomes the appeal lodged by the Commission and reduces a fine to the amount of EUR 35 000 (Verhuizingen Coppens), February 2013, Concurrences N° 1-2013, Art. N° 50435, pp. 62-63

Visites 335

All reviews