The General Court had upheld a Commission decision of July 2010 fining several companies for coordinating prices and allocating sales quotas for animal feed phosphates in Europe. In this case the Commission ran settlement and ordinary procedures in parallel for different companies in the same cartel investigation. Today’s judgment addresses in particular the issue of such so-called “hybrid” cases, where some parties settle and others don’t.
The highest EU court rejected Timab’s claim that the Commission had punished the company for not settling and confirmed that Timab had suffered no discrimination for not settling the case.
In July 2010, the Commission closed its first “hybrid” cartel investigation, with two separate decisions, one for settling companies and one for Timab, which chose not to settle the case. Timab brought an action for the annulment of the decision relating to it.
Through the cartel settlement procedure, the Commission benefits from a shorter, more efficient administrative process. If not all parties wish to settle, the Commission can decide to run the settlement and the standard procedure in the same cartel investigation.
Today’s judgment by the EU Court of Justice fully upholds the Commission’s findings and the fine of €59.85 million imposed jointly and severally on Timab and its parent company CFPR of the Roullier Group. It confirms that the fine imposed on Timab reflected the gravity and duration of the infringement and was an accurate application of the rules concerning the calculation of fines. In doing so, the Court confirmed the Commission’s approach to take into account new information in the course of the standard procedure.
It held in particular that the Commission can depart from ranges of fines discussed during settlement talks for a company that in the end choose not to settle. In such cases, the Commission is bound to make its assessment and fines calculation on the basis of all relevant elements present at the time of the final decision.
Full content: New Europe
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Nvidia and Microsoft Sued for Allegedly Undercutting AI Technology Patent Prices
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
White & Case Strengthens Antitrust and M&A Practices with New Partner Additions
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Judge Dismisses Antitrust Lawyers’ Fee Demand Over JetBlue-Spirit Deal
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
Boston Landlords Named as US Sues RealPage Over Alleged Rent-Inflating Practices
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
Judge to Weigh Landmark NCAA Settlement Proposal in Antitrust Lawsuit
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Canada & Mexico
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Competitive Convergence: Mexico’s 30-Year Quest for Antitrust Parity with its Northern Neighbor
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Competition and Digital Markets in North America: A Comparative Study of Antitrust Investigations in Mexico and the United States
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Recent Antitrust Development in Mexico: COFECE’s Preliminary Report on Amazon and Mercado Libre
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
The Cost of Making COFECE Disappear
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI