Judgment_paragraph 314 · Socitrel - Sociedade Industrial de Trefilaria, SA and Companhia Previdente-Sociedade de Controle de Participações Financeiras, SA v European Commission (T-413/10, T-414/10)

314In order to determine whether a mitigating circumstance is applicable to an undertaking on the ground that it did not actually implement unlawful agreements, it is necessary to determine whether the undertaking put forward arguments capable of showing that, during the period in which it was party to the offending agreements, it actually avoided implementing them by adopting competitive conduct on the market or, at the very least, whether it clearly and substantially breached the obligations relating to the implementation of the cartel to the point of disrupting its very operation (judgment of 15 March 2006 in Daiichi Pharmaceutical v Commission, T‑26/02, ECR, EU:T:2006:75, paragraph 113).

Socitrel - Sociedade Industrial de Trefilaria, SA and Companhia Previdente-Sociedade de Controle de Participações Financeiras, SA v European Commission (T-413/10, T-414/10)

History · 1 version

Key facts

Connections