Archer Daniels Midland and Another v Commission (Competition): ECJ 18 May 2006

ECJ Appeals – Competition – Cartels – Synthetic lysine market – Fines – Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Non-retroactivity – Non bis in idem principle – Equal treatment – Turnover which may be taken into account.
‘the principle of ne bis in idem prohibits the same person from being sanctioned more than once for the same unlawful conduct in order to protect one and the same legal interest. The application of that principle is subject to three cumulative conditions: the identity of the facts, the unity of offender and the unity of legal interest protected.’
C-397/03, [2006] EUECJ C-397/03, [2006] ECR I-4429, [2006] 5 CMLR 4
Bailii, Bailii
See AlsoArcher Daniels Midland and Archer Daniels Midlands Ingredients v Commission (Judgment) ECFI 9-Jul-2003
ECFI Competition – Cartel – Lysine – Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Applicability – Gravity and duration of the infringement – Turnover – Aggravating circumstances – Mitigating circumstances – . .

Cited by:
CitedDevenish Nutrition Ltd and others v Sanofi-Aventis SA (France) and others ChD 19-Oct-2007
The claimant sought damages for the losses it had suffered as a result of price fixing by the defendant companies in the vitamin market. The European Commission had already fined the defendant for its involvement.
Held: In an action for breach . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 May 2021; Ref: scu.241901