Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Deltafina SpA v European Commission (T-29/05)
Judgment
Law
2. The submissions seeking annulment o…
The first plea, alleging infringement…
The first and second parts of the plea…
—Findings of the Court
55

Deltafina SpA v European Commission (T-29/05)

Judgment of 8 Sept 2010law://eu/cjeu/2005/t-29-05/para_55@2026-11-11

55In any event, Deltafina’s argument that undertakings which have contributed to the implementation of a cartel only in a subsidiary, accessory or passive role do not infringe Article 81(1) EC and cannot therefore be fined under Article 23(2) of Regulation No 1/2003 is also incorrect.

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: General Court · Fourth Chamber
Case: T-29/05 · ECLI:EU:T:2010:355
Decided: 8 Sept 2010
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicant: Deltafina SpA
Defendant: European Commission
Rapporteur: K. O’Higgins
Bench: 3 judges
O. Czúcz, I. Labucka, K. O’Higgins
Language: Italian
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62005TJ0029

Topics

Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

History · 1 version

8 Sept 2010Reading

Connections

Cited by 19: UBS Group AG and Others v European Commission (T-441/21); Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd and Cephalon Inc. v European Commission (T-74/21); Canon Inc. v European Commission (T-609/19); Air Canada v European Commission (T-326/17); Japan Airlines Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-340/17)2 provisions; Singapore Airlines Ltd and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte Ltd v European Commission (T-350/17); Sipcam Oxon SpA v European Commission (T-518/19); Altice Europe NV v European Commission (T-425/18); Bayer CropScience AG and Others v European Commission (T-429/13, T-451/13); Merck KGaA v European Commission (T-470/13); Jean-Pierre Bodson and Others v European Investment Bank (EIB) (T-241/14); Orange Polska S.A., formerly Telekomunikacja Polska S.A. v European Commission (T-486/11)2 provisions; Timab Industries and Cie financière et de participations Roullier (CFPR) v European Commission (T-456/10)2 provisions; Tarif Akhras v Council of the European Union (T-579/11); Evonik Degussa GmbH v European Commission (T-341/12)2 provisions; Akzo Nobel NV and Others v European Commission (T-345/12)2 provisions; Sasol and Others v European Commission (T-541/08)2 provisions; Jean-Pierre Bodson and Others v European Investment Bank (EIB) (F-83/12); Productos Asfálticos (PROAS), SA v European Commission (T-495/07)
Cites 21: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)4 provisions; Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (Text with EEA relevance); Firma Ambulanz Glöckner v Landkreis Südwestpfalz (C-475/99); Dalmine SpA v Commission of the European Communities (C-407/04 P); Dansk Rørindustri A/S, Isoplus Fernwärmetechnik Vertriebsgesellschaft mbH and Others, KE KELIT Kunststoffwerk GmbH, LR af 1998 A/S, Brugg Rohrsysteme GmbH, LR af 1998 (Deutschland) GmbH and ABB Asea Brown Boveri Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (C-189/02 P, C-202/02 P, C-205/02 P, C-206/02 P, C-207/02 P, C-208/02 P, C-213/02 P); Commission of the European Communities v Chambre syndicale nationale des entreprises de transport de fonds et valeurs (Sytraval) and Brink's France SARL (C-367/95 P); The Queen v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Secretary of State for Health, ex parte: Fedesa and others (C-331/88); Hoffmann-La Roche & Co. AG v Commission of the European Communities (85/76); SA Musique Diffusion française and others v Commission of the European Communities (100/80, 101/80, 102/80, 103/80); Roquette Frères SA v Commission of the European Communities (T-322/01); Imperial Chemical Industries plc v Commission of the European Communities (T-36/91); Archer Daniels Midland Co. and Archer Daniels Midland Ingredients Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (C-397/03); Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich AG and Others v Commission of the European Communities (T-259/02, T-260/02, T-261/02, T-262/02, T-263/02, T-264/02, T-271/02); Groupe Danone v Commission of the European Communities (T-38/02); ACF Chemiefarma NV v Commission of the European Communities (41/69); Coop de France bétail et viande and Fédération nationale des syndicats d’exploitants agricoles (FNSEA) and Others v Commission of the European Communities (C-101/07); Solvay SA v Commission of the European Communities (T-30/91); Javico International and Javico AG v Yves Saint Laurent Parfums SA (YSLP) (C-306/96); Mo Och Domsjö AB v Commission of the European Communities (T-352/94); Asnef-Equifax, Servicios de Información sobre Solvencia y Crédito, SL v Asociación de Usuarios de Servicios Bancarios (Ausbanc) (C-238/05); JFE Engineering Corp., formerly NKK Corp., Nippon Steel Corp., JFE Steel Corp. and Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (T-67/00, T-68/00, T-71/00, T-78/00)