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
Brugg Kabel AG and Kabelwerke Brugg AG Holding v European Commission (T-441/14)
III. Law
A. The claims for annulment
2. Second plea, alleging that the Comm…
95

Brugg Kabel AG and Kabelwerke Brugg AG Holding v European Commission (T-441/14)

Judgment of 12 Jul 2018law://eu/cjeu/2014/t-441-14/para_95@2026-11-12

95In addition, it should be observed that the conditions governing the territorial application of Article 101 TFEU may be satisfied in two hypotheses.

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

Key facts

Court: General Court · Eighth Chamber
Case: T-441/14 · ECLI:EU:T:2018:453
Decided: 12 Jul 2018
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicants: Brugg Kabel AG; Kabelwerke Brugg AG Holding
Defendant: European Commission
Rapporteur: M. Kancheva
Bench: 3 judges
A.M. Collins, M. Kancheva, R. Barents
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62014TJ0441

Topics

Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

History · 1 version

12 Jul 2018Reading

Connections

Cited by 21: Qualcomm, Inc. v European Commission (T-671/19)2 provisions; eins energie in sachsen GmbH & Co. KG v European Commission (T-59/21); Naturstrom AG v European Commission (T-60/21); Crédit agricole SA and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v European Commission (T-113/17); enercity AG v European Commission (T-65/21); Mainova AG v European Commission (T-64/21); Stadtwerke Leipzig GmbH v European Commission (T-55/21); GGEW, Gruppen-Gas- und Elektrizitätswerk Bergstraße AG v European Commission (T-62/21); EVH GmbH v European Commission (T-53/21)2 provisions; Stadtwerke Hameln Weserbergland GmbH, formerly GWS Stadtwerke Hameln GmbH v European Commission (T-58/21); TEAG Thüringer Energie AG v European Commission (T-56/21); EnergieVerbund Dresden GmbH v European Commission (T-61/21); Singapore Airlines Ltd and Singapore Airlines Cargo Pte Ltd v European Commission (T-350/17); Deutsche Lufthansa AG and Others v European Commission (T-342/17); Japan Airlines Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-340/17)2 provisions; Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV v European Commission (T-325/17); Martinair Holland NV v European Commission (T-323/17); British Airways plc v European Commission (T-341/17); Cargolux Airlines International SA v European Commission (T-334/17); SAS Cargo Group A/S and Others v European Commission (T-324/17)2 provisions; Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd v European Commission (T-343/17)
Cites 20: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)3 provisions; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (consolidated 2016)3 provisions; Treaty on 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); Schindler Holding Ltd and Others v European Commission (C-501/11 P); A. Ahlström Osakeyhtiö and others v Commission of the European Communities (89/85, 104/85, 114/85, 116/85, 117/85, 125/85, 126/85, 127/85, 128/85, 129/85); Shell Petroleum NV and Others v European Commission (T-343/06); Nexans France SAS and Nexans SA v European Commission (T-135/09); Nexans SA and Nexans France SAS v European Commission (C-37/13 P); Bolloré v European Commission (T-372/10); Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd and Nippon Steel Corp. v Commission of the European Communities (C-403/04 P, C-405/04 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); Pfizer Animal Health SA v Council of the European Union (T-13/99); Siemens AG and Others v European Commission (C-239/11); Corus UK Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (C-199/99 P); Trelleborg Industrie SAS and Trelleborg AB v European Commission (T-147/09, T-148/09); Quinn Barlo Ltd, Quinn Plastics NV and Quinn Plastics GmbH v European Commission (T-208/06); European Commission v Verhuizingen Coppens NV (C-441/11 P); Dunlop Slazenger International Ltd v Commission of the European Communities (T-43/92); Fresh Del Monte Produce, Inc. v European Commission (T-587/08)