Setting of Fines for Cartels in ICN Jurisdictions - International ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

28 6. AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING ELEMENTS Chart A: Aggravating factors Country Duration 45 Recidivism Role in offence ICN — SETTING OF FINES FOR CARTELS IN ICN JURISDICTIONS Refusal of cooperation Obstruction Others Austria Yes Yes Yes Brazil Yes Yes Yes Canada Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Czech Republic Yes Yes Yes Yes European Union Yes Yes Yes Yes France Yes Yes Germany Yes Yes Hungary Yes BA46 PF47 PF Ireland PF PF Italy Yes Yes Yes Yes Japan Yes Jordan Yes Yes Yes Korea Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Mexico Yes Yes Yes Yes Netherlands Yes Yes Yes Yes New Zealand Norway Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Russia Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Serbia Yes Yes Yes Yes Switzerland Yes Yes Yes Yes Turkey Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes USA Yes Yes Yes 45 Only if duration is not considered in the basic amount of the fi ne. 46 “BA” indicates when the factor is considered at the calculation of the basic amount of the fi ne. 47 “PF” indicates when the factor does not necessarily affect the amount of the fi ne, but a separate procedural fi ne may be imposed.
Chart B: Mitigating factors Country Negligence Immediate termination State action defence Effective cooperation 6. AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING ELEMENTS 29 Limited participation Antitrust compliance programme Others Austria Brazil Yes Yes Canada Yes Yes Czech Republic Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes European Union Yes48 Yes Yes 49 Yes France Yes50 Yes 51 Germany Yes Yes Hungary Ireland Yes Yes Yes Yes Italy Yes Yes Yes Yes Japan Jordan Yes Yes Korea Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Mexico Yes Netherlands Yes Yes Yes New Zealand Norway Yes Yes Yes Yes Russia Yes Yes Yes Yes Serbia Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Switzerland Yes Yes Yes Yes Turkey Yes Yes Yes Yes USA Yes Yes Yes52 48 Not really applied in practice. 49 This aspect is considered mainly in the context of the leniency policy. In cases where undertakings do not qualify for the purposes of the Leniency Notice, a reduction of the fi ne in consideration of the undertaking’s cooperation beyond its legal obligations is unlikely and granted only under exceptional circumstances. 50 Similar approach as the one of the European Commission above. 51 In the context of settlements. 52 While the US Sentencing Guidelines provide for a possible reduction in an organization’s fi ne for having in place an effective ethics and compliance programme, this provision has never been successfully utilized by a corporate defendant charged with federal antitrust offence. ICN — SETTING OF FINES FOR CARTELS IN ICN JURISDICTIONS
Page 1: International Competition Network C
Page 4 and 5: Europe Direct is a service to help
Page 7 and 8: 1. INTRODUCTION 1. INTRODUCTION 5 T
Page 9 and 10: 2. PRELIMINARY ISSUES 2. PRELIMINAR
Page 11 and 12: 2. PRELIMINARY ISSUES 9 prosecuted
Page 13 and 14: 3. ADDRESSEES OF SANCTIONS AND TRAN
Page 15 and 16: 3. ADDRESSEES OF SANCTIONS AND TRAN
Page 17 and 18: 4. TYPES OF FINE-SETTING SYSTEMS AN
Page 19 and 20: 4. TYPES OF FINE-SETTING SYSTEMS AN
Page 21 and 22: 5. DETERMINATION OF THE BASIC FINE
Page 23: 5.3 In the absence of a basic amoun
Page 26 and 27: 24 6. AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING EL
Page 28 and 29: 26 6. AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING EL
Page 33 and 34: 7. LIMITS (MAXIMA AND MINIMA) 7.1 L
Page 35 and 36: 7. LIMITS (MAXIMA AND MINIMA) 33
Page 37 and 38: AUSTRIA BRAZIL CANADA CZECH REPUBLI
Page 39 and 40: NETHERLANDS NEW ZEALAND NORWAY RUSS
Page 41 and 42: 8. INTERACTIONS WITH DIRECT SETTLEM
Page 43: 8. INTERACTIONS WITH DIRECT SETTLEM
Page 46 and 47: 44 9. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 9.2.5 The
Page 48 and 49: 46 ANNEX 1. ICN QUESTIONNAIRE ON FI
Page 50 and 51: European Commission Setting of fi n
Page 52: ISBN 978-92-79-08397-6 KD-30-08-288

Setting of Fines for Cartels in ICN Jurisdictions - International ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?