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

European Union
Chalkor AE Epexergasias Metallon v European Commission (C-386/10 P)
Judgment
The appeal
First and second grounds of appeal: th…
Findings of the Court
59

Chalkor AE Epexergasias Metallon v European Commission (C-386/10 P)

law://eu/cjeu/2010/c-386-10/para_59@2026-11-13

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

History · 1 version

8 Dec 2011Reading

59In the interests of transparency the Commission adopted the Guidelines, in which it indicates the basis on which it will take account of one or other aspect of the infringement and what this will imply as regards the amount of the fine.

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

Connections

Cited by 25: Polskie sieci elektroenergetyczne S.A. and Others v European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (C-281/23 P); UBS Group AG, venant aux droits de Credit Suisse Group AG and Others v European Commission (T-84/22); UBS Group AG and Others v European Commission (T-441/21); HSBC Holdings plc and Others v European Commission (T-561/21); WS v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-221/23); Crédit agricole SA and Others v European Commission (T-386/21); Silgan Holdings, Inc. and Others v European Commission (T-589/22); Crown Holdings, Inc. and Crown Cork & Seal Deutschland Holdings GmbH v European Commission (T-587/22); Pharol, SGPS, SA v European Commission (T-181/22); Conserve Italia - Consorzio Italiano fra cooperative agricole Soc. coop. agr. and Conserves France v European Commission (T-59/22); Biogaran SAS v European Commission (C-207/19); JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Others v European Commission (T-106/17); Crédit agricole SA and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v European Commission (T-113/17); Bulgarian Energy Holding EAD and Others v European Commission (T-136/19); Clariant AG and Clariant International AG v European Commission (T-590/20); Google LLC and Alphabet, Inc. v European Commission (T-604/18); Singapore Airlines Ltd and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte Ltd v European Commission (T-350/17); Latam Airlines Group SA and Lan Cargo SA v European Commission (T-344/17); Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd v European Commission (T-343/17); SAS Cargo Group A/S and Others v European Commission (T-324/17); Cargolux Airlines International SA v European Commission (T-334/17); British Airways plc v European Commission (T-341/17); Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV v European Commission (T-325/17); Japan Airlines Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-340/17); Air France-KLM v European Commission (T-337/17)
Cites 20: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)2 provisions; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003; Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij NV (LVM), DSM NV and DSM Kunststoffen BV, Montedison SpA, Elf Atochem SA, Degussa AG, Enichem SpA, Wacker-Chemie GmbH and Hoechst AG and Imperial Chemical Industries plc (ICI) v Commission of the European Communities (C-238/99 P, C-244/99 P, C-245/99 P, C-247/99 P, C-250/99 P, C-251/99 P, C-252/99 P, C-254/99 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 Tetra Laval BV (C-12/03 P); Aalborg Portland A/S, Irish Cement Ltd, Ciments français SA, Italcementi - Fabbriche Riunite Cemento SpA, Buzzi Unicem SpA and Cementir - Cementerie del Tirreno SpA v Commission of the European Communities (C-204/00 P, C-205/00 P, C-211/00 P, C-213/00 P, C-217/00 P, C-219/00 P); Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the European Communities (C-525/04 P); SA Musique Diffusion française and others v Commission of the European Communities (100/80, 101/80, 102/80, 103/80); Ventouris Group Enterprises SA v Commission of the European Communities (T-59/99); Archer Daniels Midland Co. and Archer Daniels Midland Ingredients Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (C-397/03); William Prym GmbH & Co. KG and Prym Consumer GmbH & Co. KG v Commission of the European Communities (C-534/07); EEC Council: Regulation No 17: First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty; DEB Deutsche Energiehandels- und Beratungsgesellschaft mbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (C-279/09); Brahim Samba Diouf v Ministre du Travail, de l’Emploi et de l’Immigration (C-69/10); Union Pigments AS v Commission of the European Communities (T-62/02); Chalkor AE Epexergasias Metallon v European Commission (T-21/05); Claude Chartry v Belgian State (C-457/09); KE KELIT Kunststoffwerk GmbH v Commission of the European Communities (T-17/99); Decision 2006/485

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Second Chamber
Case: C-386/10 P · ECLI:EU:C:2011:815
Decided: 8 Dec 2011
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicant: Chalkor AE Epexergasias Metallon
Defendant: European Commission
Rapporteur: A. Rosas
Advocate General: E. Sharpston
Bench: 5 judges
J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, U. Lõhmus, A. Rosas, A. Ó Caoimh, A. Arabadjiev
Language: English
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62010CJ0386

Topics

Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

Judgment of 8 Dec 2011