Search results
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) Co. II-3387. Summary of the Judgment. gs. 8. II - 3383. SUMMARY — CASE T-41/96. nc.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, extended composition) of 26 October 2000. - Bayer AG v Commission of the European Communities.
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.
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.
4 sty 2024 · Bayer AG v Commission [1996] Case T-41/96 R. 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.
Belmora LLC v. Bayer Consumer Care AG (Belmora I), 819 F.3d 697, 715 (4th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 1202 (2017). On re-mand, Belmora filed an answer to Bayer’s complaint and brought seven counterclaims. Both parties moved for summary judgment. Bayer sought summary judg-ment on each of Belmora’s counterclaims and affir-
In November 2006, Texana sued Bayer in Texas state court for several claims related to the contamination of the United States rice supply by Bayer’s genetically modified rice.1 Among the damages claimed, Texana alleged the contaminated rice damaged its property “including any uncontaminated rice it purchased, and its plant, equipment, and impro...
