CASE COMMENTS: PROCEDURES - ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES - CARTEL - LIABILITY OF THE PARENT COMPANY FOR THE CARTEL OFFENSES OF ITS SUBSIDIARY - INTERNAL COMPLIANCE PROGRAM - SANCTIONS - VALIDITY OF ARTICLE 23(2) OF REGULATION (EC) No 1/2003 – LAWFULNESS OF THE 1998 COMMISSION GUIDELINES ON THE METHOD OF SETTING FINES

Cartel - Appeal against a judgement of the General Court confirming a decision of the Commission: Advocate General Juliane Kokott invites the Court of Justice to reject the appeal introduced by one of the companies condemned in the elevators and escalators cartel case, finding the arguments of the appellant to be unfounded, not sufficient, and even absurd (Schindler)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. On 18 April 2013, Advocate General Juliane Kokott delivered her Opinion in Case C-501/11 (Schindler Holding Ltd and Others). In that case, it suggests, unsurprisingly, that the Court of Justice of the European Union to dismiss the appeal in its entirety. by Schindler Holding Ltd and several of its subsidiaries in the matter of the cartel of elevators and escalators, which we remember that different European Union institutions had been the victims. It it is true that by raising, by no less than 13 means, a series of legal questions of principle in connection with the punishment of offences in antitrust law, Schindler, which is one of the world's leading groups

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.