Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62009TA0519

Case T-519/09: Judgment of the General Court of 21 May 2014  — Toshiba v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Power transformers market — Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement — Market-sharing agreement — Proof of distancing from the cartel — Restriction of competition — Effect on trade — Barriers to entry — Fines — Basic amount — Reference year — Section 18 of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Use of a notional market share in the EEA market)

OJ C 212, 7.7.2014, p. 23–23 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

7.7.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/23


Judgment of the General Court of 21 May 2014 — Toshiba v Commission

(Case T-519/09) (1)

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Power transformers market - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Market-sharing agreement - Proof of distancing from the cartel - Restriction of competition - Effect on trade - Barriers to entry - Fines - Basic amount - Reference year - Section 18 of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Use of a notional market share in the EEA market))

2014/C 212/26

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Toshiba Corp. (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: J. MacLennan, Solicitor, A. Schulz, J. Jourdan and P. Berghe, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by J. Bourke and K. Mojzesowicz, and subsequently by K. Mojzesowicz and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision of 7 October 2009 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.129 — Power Transformers), and, in the alternative, for a reduction in the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant in that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1)

Dismisses the action;

2)

Orders Toshiba Corp. to pay the costs.


(1)  OJ C 51, 27.2.2010.


Top