This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62013TA0467
Case T-467/13: Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2016 — Arrow Group and Arrow Generics v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for antidepressant medicinal products containing the active pharmaceutical ingredient citalopram — Concept of restriction of competition ‘by object’ — Potential competition — Generic medicinal products — Barriers to market entry resulting from the existence of patents — Agreements concluded between a patent holder and a generic undertaking — Fines — Legal certainty — Principle that penalties must have a proper legal basis — Duration of the Commission’s investigation — Rights of the defence — Single and continuous infringement)
Case T-467/13: Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2016 — Arrow Group and Arrow Generics v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for antidepressant medicinal products containing the active pharmaceutical ingredient citalopram — Concept of restriction of competition ‘by object’ — Potential competition — Generic medicinal products — Barriers to market entry resulting from the existence of patents — Agreements concluded between a patent holder and a generic undertaking — Fines — Legal certainty — Principle that penalties must have a proper legal basis — Duration of the Commission’s investigation — Rights of the defence — Single and continuous infringement)
Case T-467/13: Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2016 — Arrow Group and Arrow Generics v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Market for antidepressant medicinal products containing the active pharmaceutical ingredient citalopram — Concept of restriction of competition ‘by object’ — Potential competition — Generic medicinal products — Barriers to market entry resulting from the existence of patents — Agreements concluded between a patent holder and a generic undertaking — Fines — Legal certainty — Principle that penalties must have a proper legal basis — Duration of the Commission’s investigation — Rights of the defence — Single and continuous infringement)
IO C 383, 17.10.2016, pp. 10–11
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
17.10.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 383/10 |
Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2016 — Arrow Group and Arrow Generics v Commission
(Case T-467/13) (1)
((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market for antidepressant medicinal products containing the active pharmaceutical ingredient citalopram - Concept of restriction of competition ‘by object’ - Potential competition - Generic medicinal products - Barriers to market entry resulting from the existence of patents - Agreements concluded between a patent holder and a generic undertaking - Fines - Legal certainty - Principle that penalties must have a proper legal basis - Duration of the Commission’s investigation - Rights of the defence - Single and continuous infringement))
(2016/C 383/14)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: Arrow Group ApS (Roskilde, Denmark) and Arrow Generics Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S.D. Kon, C. Firth and C. Humpe, Solicitors)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castilla Contreras and B. Mongin, acting as Agents, and by G. Peretz, Barrister)
Re:
Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2013) 3803 final of 19 June 2013 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.39226 — Lundbeck) and for reduction of the amount of the fine imposed on the applicants by that decision.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders Arrow Group ApS and Arrow Generics Ltd to pay the costs. |