Case T- 272/12 Energetický a průmyslový and EP Investment Advisors v Commission (obstructing an inspection) [Archived]

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
Published by a LexisNexis Competition expert
Practice notes

Case T- 272/12 Energetický a průmyslový and EP Investment Advisors v Commission (obstructing an inspection) [Archived]

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

Published by a LexisNexis Competition expert

Practice notes
imgtext

CASE HUB

ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 26 November 2014; it is no longer maintained.

See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases

Case facts

OutlineAppeal to the General Court seeking Annulment or a reduction in the level of fine imposed regarding the Commission's decision of 28 March 2012 finding an infringement of Article 23 of Regulation 1/2003 and imposing a fine of €2.5m on Czech energy company Energetický and its business advisory unit EP Advisors for their alleged obstruction during an unannounced Commission inspection. The applicants claim that there were irregularities in the conduct of the inspection insofar as the Commission did not ensure that the relevant individuals had been properly informed of their duties (or of the consequences of non-compliance) and, furthermore, breached the 'presumption of innocence' principle as it allegedly approached the case with insufficient care and transparency. On 26 November 2014, the General Court dismissed the action in its entirety. This case focuses on the
Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Key definition:
Annulment definition
What does Annulment mean?

A declaration of the court that a marriage was not legally valid or had become legally invalid.

Read more readmore

Popular documents

Case C- 67/13 Groupement des Cartes Bancaires (CB) v Commission ('by object' restrictions) [Archived]

Case C- 67/13 Groupement des Cartes Bancaires (CB) v Commission ('by object' restrictions) [Archived]CASE HUBARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 11 September 2014; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant

Case C- 122/16 British Airways v Commission (Air cargo cartel) [Archived]

Case C- 122/16 British Airways v Commission (Air cargo cartel) [Archived]CASE HUB (date of judgment—14/11/2017) See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant casesCase factsARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision of 14 November 2017; it is

Booking Holdings/eTraveli Group (M.10615) [Archived]

Booking Holdings/eTraveli Group (M.10615) [Archived]CASE HUBNOTE—appeal lodged before the General Court in Case T- 1139/23ARCHIEVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the decision 25 September 2023; it is no longer maintained.See further, timeline and commentary .Case

Case C- 382/12 MasterCard and others v Commission (MIFs) [Archived]

Case C- 382/12 MasterCard and others v Commission (MIFs) [Archived]CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 11 September 2014; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant casesCase factsOutlineAppeal