CASE COMMENTS : ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES – ANTICOMPETITIVE AGREEMENTS –IMPUTABILITY – PARENT-SUBSIDIARY RELATIONSHIP – PARENTAL LIABILITY – DUTY TO STATE REASON – REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF LIABILITY OF PARENT COMPANY – ACQUISITION OF A COMPANY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OFFENSE – JOINT LIABILITY – EVIDENCE OF INVOLVEMENT IN THE CARTEL – DATE OF FILING OF A LENIENCY APPLICATION – MARKETS OF BLEACHING CHEMICALS

Imputability – Duty to state reason: The General Court annuls the Commission’s decision concerning a cartel on bleaching chemicals in three judgements (Air liquide, Solvay, FMC Foret)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Trib. EU, 16 June 2011, L'Air liquide v. Commission, Case T-185/06, "Hydrogen peroxide and perborate". Trib. EU, 16 June 2011, Solvay v. Commission, Case T-186/06, "Hydrogen Peroxide and Perborate". Trib. EU, 16 June 2011, FMC Foret v Commission, Case T-191/06, "Hydrogen peroxide and perborate". Trib. EU, 16 June 2011, Caffaro v. Commission, Case T-192/06, "Hydrogen peroxide and perborate". Trib. EU, 16 June 2011, SNIA v. Commission, Case T-194/06, "Hydrogen peroxide and perborate". Trib. EU, 16 June 2011, Solvay Solexis v. Commission, Case T-195/06, "Hydrogen peroxide and perborate". Trib. EU, 16 June 2011, Edison v. Commission, Case T-196/06,

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

Quotation

Michel Debroux, Imputability – Duty to state reason: The General Court annuls the Commission’s decision concerning a cartel on bleaching chemicals in three judgements (Air liquide, Solvay, FMC Foret), 16 June 2011, Concurrences N° 3-2011, Art. N° 37336, pp. 99-100

Visites 597

All reviews