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
Toshiba Corporation v European Commission (C-373/14 P)
Judgment
The appeal
The first ground of appeal
Findings of the Court
29

Toshiba Corporation v European Commission (C-373/14 P)

Judgment of 20 Jan 2016law://eu/cjeu/2014/c-373-14/para_29@2026-11-11

29In respect of such agreements, the analysis of the economic and legal context of which the practice forms part may thus be limited to what is strictly necessary in order to establish the existence of a restriction of competition by object.

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Second Chamber
Case: C-373/14 P · ECLI:EU:C:2016:26
Decided: 20 Jan 2016
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicant: Toshiba Corporation
Defendant: European Commission
Rapporteur: J.L. da Cruz Vilaça
Advocate General: M. Wathelet
Bench: 5 judges
R. Silva de Lapuerta, J.L. da Cruz Vilaça, A. Arabadjiev, C. Lycourgos, J.-C. Bonichot
Language: English
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62014CJ0373

Topics

Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

History · 1 version

20 Jan 2016Reading

Connections

Cited by 23: Autoridade da Concorrência and Others v Ministério Público (C-331/21)2 provisions; CD Tondela – Futebol, SAD and Others v Autoridade da Concorrência (C-133/24); Cargolux Airlines International SA v European Commission (C-401/22 P); Singapore Airlines Ltd and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte Ltd v European Commission (C-379/22 P); Air Canada v European Commission (C-367/22 P); Meliá Hotels International, S.A. v Associação Ius Omnibus (C-286/24); HSBC Holdings plc and Others v European Commission (T-561/21); European Commission v KRKA, tovarna zdravil, d.d (C-151/19); European Commission v Servier SAS and Others (C-176/19 P); Crédit agricole SA and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v European Commission (T-113/17); JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Others v European Commission (T-106/17); Super Bock Bebidas SA and Others v Autoridade da Concorrência (C-211/22); Singapore Airlines Ltd and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte Ltd v European Commission (T-350/17); Cargolux Airlines International SA v European Commission (T-334/17); Nippon Chemi-Con Corporation v European Commission (T-363/18); Tokin Corp. v European Commission (T-343/18); International Skating Union v European Commission (T-93/18); Gazdasági Versenyhivatal v Budapest Bank Nyrt. and Others (C-228/18); Generics (UK) Ltd and Others v Competition and Markets Authority (C-307/18); LS Cable & System Ltd v European Commission (C-596/18); Campine NV and Campine Recycling NV v European Commission (T-240/17); Pometon SpA v European Commission (T-433/16)2 provisions; Groupe Canal + v European Commission (T-873/16)
Cites 16: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016); 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); Société Technique Minière (L.T.M.) v Maschinenbau Ulm GmbH (M.B.U.) (56/65); ING Pensii, Societate de Administrare a unui Fond de Pensii Administrat Privat SA v Consiliul Concurenței (C-172/14); Solvay Solexis SpA v European Commission (C-449/11); Archer Daniels Midland Co. v Commission of the European Communities (C-510/06); YKK Corporation and Others v European Commission (C-408/12 P); Toshiba Corp. v European Commission (T-519/09); Comap SA v European Commission (C-290/11); 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); GlaxoSmithKline Services Unlimited v Commission of the European Communities and Commission of the European Communities v GlaxoSmithKline Services Unlimited and European Association of Euro Pharmaceutical Companies (EAEPC) v Commission of the European Communities and Asociación de exportadores españoles de productos farmacéuticos (Aseprofar) v Commission of the European Communities (C-501/06); Total Marketing Services SA v European Commission (C-634/13 P); Siemens AG and Others v European Commission (C-239/11); Dole Food Company, Inc. and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe v European Commission (C-286/13 P); T-Mobile Netherlands BV, KPN Mobile NV, Orange Nederland NV and Vodafone Libertel NV v Raad van bestuur van de Nederlandse Mededingingsautoriteit (C-8/08); Groupement des cartes bancaires (CB) v European Commission (C-67/13 P)