CASE COMMENT: ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES - ARTICLE 81 EC - SODIUM GLUCONATE MARKET - FINES - ATTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Fine mitigating: The ECJ rejects ADM’s appeal against the CFI’s judgment in the Sodium gluconate case (Archer Daniels Midland)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. ECJ, 19 March 2009, Archer Daniels Midland v Commission, Case C-510/06 P In support of its appeal against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 27 September 2006 in CaseT 329/01 Archer Daniels Midland v Commission [2006] ECR II 3255, by which the Court dismissed its action for partial annulment of Commission Decision C(2001) 2931 final of 2 October 2001 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/E 1/36.756, Sodium Gluconate) (ConcurrencesNo. 4-2006, p. 69). The applicant raised four pleas in law, all alleging an error of law, first, in the application of

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, Fine mitigating: The ECJ rejects ADM’s appeal against the CFI’s judgment in the Sodium gluconate case (Archer Daniels Midland), 19 March 2009, Concurrences N° 2-2009, Art. N° 25996, pp. 98-99

Visites 2620

All reviews