- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-438/14: Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2018 — Silec Cable and General Cable v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — European market for power cables — Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU — Concept of an undertaking — Economic succession — Single and continuous infringement — Evidence of the infringement — Public distancing — Duration of participation — Equal treatment — Gravity of the infringement — Unlimited jurisdiction)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62014TA0438
62014TA0438
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
17.9.2018
Official Journal of the European Union
C 328/33
(Case T-438/14) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European market for power cables - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Concept of an undertaking - Economic succession - Single and continuous infringement - Evidence of the infringement - Public distancing - Duration of participation - Equal treatment - Gravity of the infringement - Unlimited jurisdiction))
(2018/C 328/43)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: Silec Cable SAS (Montereau-Fault-Yonne, France) and General Cable Corp. (Wilmington, Delaware, United States) (represented by: I. Sinan, Barrister, and I. De Beni, lawyer)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Giolito and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents, and by D. Bailey, Barrister)
Re:
Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2014) 2139 final of 2 April 2014 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39610 — Power cables) in so far as it concerns the applicants and, in the alternative, an application for a reduction in the amount of the fines imposed on the applicants in that decision.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1.Dismisses the action;
2.Orders Silec Cable SAS and General Cable Corp. to pay the costs.
(<span class="note">1</span>) OJ C 282, 25.8.2014.