*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. A few days before the first president of the Paris Court confirmed that the presumptions of anti-competitive practices remaining in the file after the invalidation of the visit and seizure operations carried out at Samsung's premises justified in themselves the OVS ordered at Whirlpool's premises, the first president of the Papeete Court of Appeal had reached substantially identical conclusions in the case of asphalt roadworks in French Polynesia. In fact, in this last case, the Criminal Division of the Court of Cassation, recalling that the first president of the Court of Appeal, called upon to rule on the validity of an order
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.