This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2006/036/60
Case T-48/02: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 December 2005 — Brouwerij Haacht v Commission (Competition — Cartels — Fines — Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Effective capacity of the offender to cause significant damage to other operators — Attenuating circumstances — Leniency Notice)
Case T-48/02: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 December 2005 — Brouwerij Haacht v Commission (Competition — Cartels — Fines — Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Effective capacity of the offender to cause significant damage to other operators — Attenuating circumstances — Leniency Notice)
Case T-48/02: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 December 2005 — Brouwerij Haacht v Commission (Competition — Cartels — Fines — Guidelines on the method of setting fines — Effective capacity of the offender to cause significant damage to other operators — Attenuating circumstances — Leniency Notice)
OJ C 36, 11.2.2006, p. 28–28
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
11.2.2006 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 36/28 |
Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 December 2005 — Brouwerij Haacht v Commission
(Case T-48/02) (1)
(Competition - Cartels - Fines - Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Effective capacity of the offender to cause significant damage to other operators - Attenuating circumstances - Leniency Notice)
(2006/C 36/60)
Language of the case: Dutch
Parties
Applicant: Brouwerij Haacht NV (Boortmeerbeek, Belgium) (represented by: Y. van Gerven, F. Louis and H. Viaene, lawyers)
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: A. Bouquet and W. Wils, Agents)
Application for
annulment of, and in the alternative for a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicant by, Article 4 of Commission Decision 2003/569/EC of 5 December 2001 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty (Case IV/37.614/F3 PO/Interbrew and Alken-Maes) (OJ 2003 L 200, p. 1)
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1) |
Dismisses the application; |
|
2) |
Orders the applicant to pay the costs. |