CASE COMMENT : ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES - CARTEL - FINE - GRAVITY - LEADERSHIP ROLE - NON BIS IN IDEM

Fine mitigating: The CFI upholds most of the Commission’s décision in the sorbates cartel, but states that the Commission failed to qualify leadership role and infringed the principle of good administration and equal treatment and therefore reduces the fine by € 25 M (Hoechst c/ Commission)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. – CFI, 18 June 2008, Hoechst v. Commission, Case T-410/03, "Sorbates". This lengthy judgment belongs to the category of those which contain almost all the pleas in law which appear to be capable of being raised against a Commission decision imposing a fine under the former Leniency and Fines Notices and Guidelines. As the first half of the judgment deals mainly with procedural issues which will not be dealt with

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

  • Rizom Legal (Paris)

Quotation

Michel Debroux, Fine mitigating: The CFI upholds most of the Commission’s décision in the sorbates cartel, but states that the Commission failed to qualify leadership role and infringed the principle of good administration and equal treatment and therefore reduces the fine by € 25 M (Hoechst c/ Commission), 18 June 2008, Concurrences N° 3-2008, Art. N° 20002, pp. 86-87

Visites 3215

All reviews