Yahoo Poland Wyszukiwanie w Internecie

Search results

  1. Bayer AG v Commission of the European Communities. Competition - Parallel imports - Article 85 (1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81 (1) EC) - Meaning of "agreement between undertakings" - Proof of the existence of an agreement - Market in pharmaceutical products. Case T-41/96.

  2. Summary of the Judgment 1. Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Agreements between undertakings — Meaning — Bilateral or multilateral conduct — Included — Uni­ lateral conduct — Not included — Conduct appearing unilateral — Need to prove acquiescence by other undertakings in that conduct

  3. BAYER V COMMISSION. JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Fifth Chamber, Extended Composition) 26 October 2000 * In Case T-41/96, Bayer AG, established in Leverkusen (Germany), represented by J. Sedemund, Rechtsanwalt, Cologne, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of A. May, 398 Route d'Esch, applicant, supported by ...

  4. Bayer AG v Commission of the European Communities. Competition - Parallel imports - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Meaning of "agreement between undertakings" - Proof of the existence of an agreement - Market in pharmaceutical products.

  5. 4 sty 2024 · Facts. Bayer made and marketed medical drug intended to treat heart disease. As result of differences between national health authorities of MS, prices of these drugs were different across EU, lower in France and Spain. So Spain and France exported great amounts of drugs to the UK.

  6. The Commission held that a tacit agreement existed between Bayer and the wholesalers not to export to the UK contrary to Article 81(1): in its view the agreement was evidenced by the wholesalers ceasing to supply the UK in response to Bayer's tactic of reducing supplies.

  7. 31 mar 2015 · Texana Rice Mill and Texas Rice, Inc. (collectively, Texana) sued Bayer in state court in November 2006 (the Bayer Suit), and the case was removed to federal court, where it became part of the multi-district litigation in February 2007 under the case number 4:07CV416 CDP.

  1. Ludzie szukają również