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
"Eturas" UAB and Others v Lietuvos Respublikos konkurencijos taryba (C-74/14)
Judgment
Consideration of the questions referred
37

"Eturas" UAB and Others v Lietuvos Respublikos konkurencijos taryba (C-74/14)

Judgment of 21 Jan 2016law://eu/cjeu/2014/c-74-14/para_37@2026-11-10

37Consequently, the principle of effectiveness requires that an infringement of EU competition law may be proven not only by direct evidence, but also through indicia, provided that they are objective and consistent.

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Fifth Chamber
Case: C-74/14 · ECLI:EU:C:2016:42
Decided: 21 Jan 2016
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas (Supreme Administrative Court, Lithuania)
Applicants: Eturas UAB; AAA Wrislit UAB and 18 more
Baltic Clipper UAB; Baltic Tours Vilnius UAB; Daigera UAB; Ferona UAB; Freshtravel UAB; Guliverio kelionės UAB; Kelionių akademija UAB; Kelionių gurmanai UAB; Kelionių laikas UAB; Litamicus UAB; Megaturas UAB; Neoturas UAB; TopTravel UAB; Travelonline Baltics UAB; Vestekspress UAB; Visveta UAB; Zigzag Travel UAB; ZIP Travel UAB
Defendant: Lietuvos Respublikos konkurencijos taryba
Rapporteur: E. Juhász
Advocate General: M. Szpunar
Bench: 5 judges
T. von Danwitz, D. Šváby, A. Rosas, E. Juhász, C. Vajda
Language: Lithuanian
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62014CJ0074

Topics

Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

History · 1 version

21 Jan 2016Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)
Cited by 19: Tudapetrol Mineralölerzeugnisse Nils Hansen KG v European Commission (C-94/15); N. W and Others v Sanofi Pasteur MSD SNC and Others (C-621/15); AB Volvo and DAF Trucks NV v RM (C-267/20); SIA 'Zinātnes parks' v Finanšu ministrija (C-347/20); Crédit agricole SA and Others v European Commission (T-386/21)4 provisions; Bytedance Ltd v European Commission (T-077/23); Valve Corporation v European Commission (T-172/21); Super Bock Bebidas SA and Others v Autoridade da Concorrência (C-211/22); Quanta Storage, Inc. v European Commission (C-699/19 P); Air Canada v European Commission (T-326/17); Singapore Airlines Ltd and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte Ltd v European Commission (T-350/17); Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd v European Commission (T-343/17); LS Cable & System Ltd v European Commission (C-596/18); Pometon SpA v European Commission (T-433/16); Šiaulių regiono atliekų tvarkymo centras and „Ecoservice projektai“ UAB (C-531/16)3 provisions; Hansen & Rosenthal KG and H&R Wax Company Vertrieb GmbH v European Commission (C-90/15); H&R ChemPharm GmbH v European Commission (C-95/15); SIA ‘VM Remonts’(formerly SIA ‘DIV un KO’) and Others v Konkurences padome (C-542/14); Abdelhafid Bensada Benallal v État belge (C-161/15)
Cites 12: 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 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); Nike European Operations Netherlands BV v Sportland Oy (C-310/14); H.N. v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Others (C-604/12); Vlaamse federatie van verenigingen van Brood- en Banketbakkers, Ijsbereiders en Chocoladebewerkers (VEBIC) VZW (C-439/08); Pfleiderer AG v Bundeskartellamt (C-360/09); Total Marketing Services SA v European Commission (C-634/13 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); AC-Treuhand AG v European Commission (C-194/14 P); Dole Food Company, Inc. and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe v European Commission (C-286/13 P); E.ON Energie AG v European Commission (C-89/11 P)