Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 8 May 2013

Eni SpA v European Commission

Appeal — Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Butadiene rubber and emulsion styrene butadiene rubber market manufactured by emulsion polymerisation — Attributability of unlawful conduct of subsidiaries to their parent companies — Presumption of the actual exercise of a decisive influence — Obligation to state reasons — Gravity of the infringement — Multiplier for deterrence — Actual impact on the market — Aggravating circumstances — Repeated infringements

Case C‑508/11 P



Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Judgment (OJ)
18/07/2013 Eni v Commission
View pdf documents
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2013:289
08/05/2013 Eni v Commission
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2013:289
08/05/2013 Eni v Commission
Application (OJ)
28/10/2011 Eni v Commission
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Information not available

Systematic classification scheme

Information not available


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Operative part

Opinion

Information not available


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 24/09/2011

Date of the Opinion

Information not available

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

08/05/2013


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 340 from 19.11.2011, p.12

Judgment: OJ C 225 from 03.08.2013, p.11

Name of the parties

Eni v Commission

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Nehl, Hanns Peter: Kartellrecht: Konzernhaftung - ENI, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2013 p.554-555 (DE)
  2. Idot, Laurence: Sanction des cartels. La Cour rappelle les principes applicables tant pour l'imputation des comportements des filiales aux sociétés mères que pour la prise en compte de la récidive, Europe 2013 Juillet Comm. nº 7 p.40-41 (FR)
  3. Sarrazin, Cyril: Présomption d’influence déterminante : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne rejette le pourvoi et dit pour droit que la présomption réfragable d’influence déterminante ne viole pas le droit à un procès équitable (Eni), Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2013 nº 3 p.64-65 (FR)
  4. Cheynel, Benjamin: Le double effet de l'insuffisance de motivation, Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2013 nº 37 p.77 (FR)
  5. Kapural, Mirta: Odgovornost društva majke za povrede prava tržišnog natjecanja u europskom pravu (II.), Pravo i porezi 2016 n° 1 p.49-57 (HR)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Information not available

Subject-matter

  • Competition
  • - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

Provisions of national law referred to

Information not available

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

  • Actions for annulment
  • Appeal brought against a sanction
  • Appeals : dismissal on substantive grounds

Formation of the Court

première chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Berger

Advocate General

Bot

Language(s) of the Case

  • Italian

Language(s) of the Opinion

    Information not available