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.
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
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber, extended composition) of 26 October 2000. # Bayer AG v Commission of the European Communities.
Start printing. Judgment of the Court (Full Court) of 6 January 2004. Bundesverband der Arzneimittel-Importeure eV and Commission of the European Communities v Bayer AG.
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.
1. Summary judgment standard. A motion for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 requires the Court to determine whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law based on the evidence thus far presented. See FED. R. CIV. P. 56(c). “Summary judgment is proper if the pleadings, depositions, answers to ...
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
