Court Of Appeals Upholds Carrefour Fine

CC
CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang

Contributor

CMS is a Future Facing firm with 79 offices in over 40 countries and more than 5,000 lawyers globally. Combining local market insight with a global perspective, CMS provides business-focused advice to help clients navigate change confidently. The firm's expertise and innovative approach anticipate challenges and develop solutions. CMS is committed to diversity, inclusivity, and corporate social responsibility, fostering a supportive culture. The firm addresses key client concerns like efficiency and regulatory challenges through services like Law-Now, offering real-time eAlerts, mobile access, an extensive legal archive, specialist zones, and global events.

The Court of Appeal has dismissed Carrefour’s final appeal against its fine for not complying with the conditions imposed on its 2007 takeover of Ahold.
Poland Antitrust/Competition Law
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

The Court of Appeal has dismissed Carrefour's final appeal against its fine for not complying with the conditions imposed on its 2007 takeover of Ahold.

UOKiK gave its consent to the takeover on condition that Carrefour sold nine shops before the end of 2008. It then fined Carrefour PLN more than PLN 0.5 million because its disposals of two shops – in Grodzisk Mazowecki and Jaworzno – were not completed until January 2009.

Carrefour's first appeal was rejected in 2011 by the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection.  Now, the Court of Appeal has also dismissed the appeal, ruling that the merger conditions were clearly specified by UOKiK and that Carrefour should have been conscious of the severe consequences of not implementing them in time.

The court ruling is final.

This article was written for Law-Now, CMS Cameron McKenna's free online information service. To register for Law-Now, please go to www.law-now.com/law-now/mondaq

Law-Now information is for general purposes and guidance only. The information and opinions expressed in all Law-Now articles are not necessarily comprehensive and do not purport to give professional or legal advice. All Law-Now information relates to circumstances prevailing at the date of its original publication and may not have been updated to reflect subsequent developments.

The original publication date for this article was 21/05/2012.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More