Eight leading manufacturers in the supply and installation of road signs colluded at the expense of the French State and local authorities for nearly 10 years (and even longer in the case of two of the manufacturers). The companies were fined a total of €52.7 million.

Cartels & Cie, a podcast series produced by the French Competition Authority, takes you behind the scenes of some of France’s biggest anticompetitive cases. In this first season, discover the stories behind three major cartels, each explored across two or three episodes.

Guided by journalist Isabelle Souquet, the series features first-hand accounts from investigators at the French Competition Authority, as well as public- and private-sector representatives with knowledge of the cartels.

This podcast was originally produced in French and has been translated into English by the French Competition Authority. All speakers are voiced by professional actors, and all names remain unchanged.

CASE SUMMARY

Between 1997 and 2006, eight companies effectively controlled the road signs sector in France by coordinating prices and dividing up almost all public contracts. The cartel was uncovered when the authorities interrupted a meeting of the cartel members in a large Parisian restaurant. At regular meetings, the members divided up contracts and fixed the prices and discounts that could be offered to buyers, in accordance with rules set out in a document entitled “The Bible”. Each company had to follow the rules strictly, or face financial penalties. Once the cartel was uncovered, prices immediately fell sharply. Following the decision, several French départments obtained compensation through actions for damages brought before the courts.

SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE

Stanislas Martin, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

Irène Luc, judge and former Vice-President of the French Competition Authority

Virginie Beaumeunier, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

Frédéric Farigoule, Director of Roads Management for the Orne département

DECISION (in French only):

https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/sites/default/files/commitments/10d39.pdf

APPEALS

The decision is final. The reviewing courts upheld the decision on the merits. The fine was reduced by the Paris Court of Appeal.

Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal of 29 March 2012 (in French only): partially amended

Judgement of the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) of 28 May 2013 (in French only): withdrawal – appeal dismissed

This series is an educational resource for the general public. The presentation of the cartels covered is not intended to be exhaustive, and some information provided in the interviews may lack precision or simplify certain aspects of the cases. Listeners are therefore invited to consult the full text of the relevant decisions, available in French on our website (N.B.: only the French version of the full text of each decision is authentic), as well as, where applicable, any judgments subsequently handed down by the reviewing courts, for a complete and accurate understanding of the context and scope of the information presented.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Eight leading manufacturers in the supply and installation of road signs colluded at the expense of the French State and local authorities for nearly 10 years (and even longer in the case of two of the manufacturers). The companies were fined a total of €52.7 million.

Cartels & Cie, a podcast series produced by the French Competition Authority, takes you behind the scenes of some of France’s biggest anticompetitive cases. In this first season, discover the stories behind three major cartels, each explored across two or three episodes.

Guided by journalist Isabelle Souquet, the series features first-hand accounts from investigators at the French Competition Authority, as well as public- and private-sector representatives with knowledge of the cartels.

This podcast was originally produced in French and has been translated into English by the French Competition Authority. All speakers are voiced by professional actors, and all names remain unchanged.

CASE SUMMARY

Between 1997 and 2006, eight companies effectively controlled the road signs sector in France by coordinating prices and dividing up almost all public contracts. The cartel was uncovered when the authorities interrupted a meeting of the cartel members in a large Parisian restaurant. At regular meetings, the members divided up contracts and fixed the prices and discounts that could be offered to buyers, in accordance with rules set out in a document entitled “The Bible”. Each company had to follow the rules strictly, or face financial penalties. Once the cartel was uncovered, prices immediately fell sharply. Following the decision, several French départments obtained compensation through actions for damages brought before the courts.

SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE

Stanislas Martin, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

Irène Luc, judge and former Vice-President of the French Competition Authority

Virginie Beaumeunier, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

Frédéric Farigoule, Director of Roads Management for the Orne département

DECISION (in French only):

https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/sites/default/files/commitments/10d39.pdf

APPEALS

The decision is final. The reviewing courts upheld the decision on the merits. The fine was reduced by the Paris Court of Appeal.

Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal of 29 March 2012 (in French only): partially amended

Judgement of the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation) of 28 May 2013 (in French only): withdrawal – appeal dismissed

This series is an educational resource for the general public. The presentation of the cartels covered is not intended to be exhaustive, and some information provided in the interviews may lack precision or simplify certain aspects of the cases. Listeners are therefore invited to consult the full text of the relevant decisions, available in French on our website (N.B.: only the French version of the full text of each decision is authentic), as well as, where applicable, any judgments subsequently handed down by the reviewing courts, for a complete and accurate understanding of the context and scope of the information presented.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Cartels & Cie, a podcast series produced by the French Competition Authority, takes you behind the scenes of some of France’s biggest anticompetitive cases.

Guided by journalist Isabelle Souquet, the series features first-hand accounts from investigators at the French Competition Authority, as well as public- and private-sector representatives with knowledge of the cartels.

This podcast was originally produced in French and has been translated into English by the French Competition Authority. All speakers are voiced by professional actors, and all names remain unchanged.

The investigation began in 2011, based on information provided by the French consumer watchdog, the DGCCRF. The French Competition Authority then decided to carry out dawn raids at the premises of the three leading manufacturers (Gerflor, Forbo and Tarkett), as well as the trade association. The raids uncovered extensive evidence of anticompetitive practices, and two of the companies subsequently applied for leniency. The companies met secretly three to four times a year in hotels and coordinated on a range of matters, including prices, customer relationship management, sales organisation and samples of new products. The companies’ general and sales directors also communicated by telephone using nine dedicated lines. Moreover, the manufacturers agreed not to communicate on the environmental performance of their products. In determining the fines, the French Competition Authority also took into account the exceptionally long duration of the practices (ranging from 10 to 25 years, depending on the company), as well as their widespread and institutionalised nature, involving a large number of senior representatives of the companies concerned over an extended period.

SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE

Bruno Gallet, Head of Finance and Property at Paul Guiraud Hospital in Villejuif

Erwann Kerguelen, Deputy General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority and case officer at the time of the case

Anne Krenzer, Head of the Leniency Unit at the French Competition Authority

Elise Provost, Head of the Sustainability Network at the French Competition Authority

Laure Gauthier, Deputy General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority and case officer at the time of the case

Sarah Subrémon, a lawyer specialising in competition law, particularly in actions for damages arising from competition law infringements

DECISION (in French only):

https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/sites/default/files/commitments/17d20.pdf

APPEALS

The decision is final. No appeal was filed within the statutory time limit. Following the decision, actions for damages were brought by companies and public-sector bodies claiming to have suffered harm as a result of the practices. These actions, some of which are mentioned in the podcast, are currently pending before the competent courts, which will determine both the nature and extent of any harm suffered.

This series is an educational resource for the general public. The presentation of the cartels covered is not intended to be exhaustive, and some information provided in the interviews may lack precision or simplify certain aspects of the cases. Listeners are therefore invited to consult the full text of the relevant decisions, available in French on our website (N.B.: only the French version of the full text of each decision is authentic), as well as, where applicable, any judgments subsequently handed down by the reviewing courts, for a complete and accurate understanding of the context and scope of the information presented.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Cartels & Cie, a podcast series produced by the French Competition Authority, takes you behind the scenes of some of France’s biggest anticompetitive cases.

Guided by journalist Isabelle Souquet, the series features first-hand accounts from investigators at the French Competition Authority, as well as public- and private-sector representatives with knowledge of the cartels.

This podcast was originally produced in French and has been translated into English by the French Competition Authority. All speakers are voiced by professional actors, and all names remain unchanged.

The investigation began in 2011, based on information provided by the French consumer watchdog, the DGCCRF. The French Competition Authority then decided to carry out dawn raids at the premises of the three leading manufacturers (Gerflor, Forbo and Tarkett), as well as the trade association. The raids uncovered extensive evidence of anticompetitive practices, and two of the companies subsequently applied for leniency. The companies met secretly three to four times a year in hotels and coordinated on a range of matters, including prices, customer relationship management, sales organisation and samples of new products. The companies’ general and sales directors also communicated by telephone using nine dedicated lines. Moreover, the manufacturers agreed not to communicate on the environmental performance of their products. In determining the fines, the French Competition Authority also took into account the exceptionally long duration of the practices (ranging from 10 to 25 years, depending on the company), as well as their widespread and institutionalised nature, involving a large number of senior representatives of the companies concerned over an extended period.

SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE

Bruno Gallet, Head of Finance and Property at Paul Guiraud Hospital in Villejuif

Erwann Kerguelen, Deputy General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority and case officer at the time of the case

Anne Krenzer, Head of the Leniency Unit at the French Competition Authority

Elise Provost, Head of the Sustainability Network at the French Competition Authority

Laure Gauthier, Deputy General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority and case officer at the time of the case

Sarah Subrémon, a lawyer specialising in competition law, particularly in actions for damages arising from competition law infringements

DECISION (in French only):

https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/sites/default/files/commitments/17d20.pdf

APPEALS

The decision is final. No appeal was filed within the statutory time limit. Following the decision, actions for damages were brought by companies and public-sector bodies claiming to have suffered harm as a result of the practices. These actions, some of which are mentioned in the podcast, are currently pending before the competent courts, which will determine both the nature and extent of any harm suffered.

This series is an educational resource for the general public. The presentation of the cartels covered is not intended to be exhaustive, and some information provided in the interviews may lack precision or simplify certain aspects of the cases. Listeners are therefore invited to consult the full text of the relevant decisions, available in French on our website (N.B.: only the French version of the full text of each decision is authentic), as well as, where applicable, any judgments subsequently handed down by the reviewing courts, for a complete and accurate understanding of the context and scope of the information presented.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Cartels & Cie, a podcast series produced by the French Competition Authority, takes you behind the scenes of some of France’s biggest anticompetitive cases.

Guided by journalist Isabelle Souquet, the series features first-hand accounts from investigators at the French Competition Authority, as well as public- and private-sector representatives with knowledge of the cartels.

This podcast was originally produced in French and has been translated into English by the French Competition Authority. All speakers are voiced by professional actors, and all names remain unchanged.

The investigation began in 2011, based on information provided by the French consumer watchdog, the DGCCRF. The French Competition Authority then decided to carry out dawn raids at the premises of the three leading manufacturers (Gerflor, Forbo and Tarkett), as well as the trade association. The raids uncovered extensive evidence of anticompetitive practices, and two of the companies subsequently applied for leniency. The companies met secretly three to four times a year in hotels and coordinated on a range of matters, including prices, customer relationship management, sales organisation and samples of new products. The companies’ general and sales directors also communicated by telephone using nine dedicated lines. Moreover, the manufacturers agreed not to communicate on the environmental performance of their products. In determining the fines, the French Competition Authority also took into account the exceptionally long duration of the practices (ranging from 10 to 25 years, depending on the company), as well as their widespread and institutionalised nature, involving a large number of senior representatives of the companies concerned over an extended period.

SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE

Bruno Gallet, Head of Finance and Property at Paul Guiraud Hospital in Villejuif

Erwann Kerguelen, Deputy General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority and case officer at the time of the case

Anne Krenzer, Head of the Leniency Unit at the French Competition Authority

Elise Provost, Head of the Sustainability Network at the French Competition Authority

Laure Gauthier, Deputy General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority and case officer at the time of the case

Sarah Subrémon, a lawyer specialising in competition law, particularly in actions for damages arising from competition law infringements

DECISION (in French only):

https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/sites/default/files/commitments/17d20.pdf

APPEALS

The decision is final. No appeal was filed within the statutory time limit. Following the decision, actions for damages were brought by companies and public-sector bodies claiming to have suffered harm as a result of the practices. These actions, some of which are mentioned in the podcast, are currently pending before the competent courts, which will determine both the nature and extent of any harm suffered.

This series is an educational resource for the general public. The presentation of the cartels covered is not intended to be exhaustive, and some information provided in the interviews may lack precision or simplify certain aspects of the cases. Listeners are therefore invited to consult the full text of the relevant decisions, available in French on our website (N.B.: only the French version of the full text of each decision is authentic), as well as, where applicable, any judgments subsequently handed down by the reviewing courts, for a complete and accurate understanding of the context and scope of the information presented.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

France’s four leading laundry detergent makers were fined a total of €367.9 million after colluding for nearly six years over the prices and promotional deals offered to supermarket chains.

Guided by journalist Isabelle Souquet, the series features first-hand accounts from investigators at the French Competition Authority, as well as public- and private-sector representatives with knowledge of the cartels.

This podcast was originally produced in French and has been translated into English by the French Competition Authority. All speakers are voiced by professional actors, and all names remain unchanged.

CASE SUMMARY

It all began in 2008, when Unilever reported the existence of the cartel and applied for leniency, securing immunity from fines. In the months that followed, Henkel, Procter & Gamble and Colgate-Palmolive also came forward and were granted reductions in their fines. The French Competition Authority then uncovered a far-reaching cartel covering all laundry detergent brands and formats — powder, liquid and tablets. The companies’ sales directors met secretly three to four times a year in hotels and restaurants in the western suburbs of Paris. Documents seized during the investigation showed the companies used code names to conceal their identities: “Hugues” for Henkel, “Pierre” for Procter & Gamble, “Laurence” or “Louis” for Lever (Unilever), and “Christian” for Colgate. The result? Competition between laundry detergent manufacturers was restricted from 1997 to 2004, with consumers paying higher prices than in a competitive market.

SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE

Pierre Larcher, former case officer at the French Competition Authority

Virginie Beaumeunier, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

Anne Krenzer, Head of the Leniency Unit at the French Competition Authority

Stanislas Martin, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

DECISION (in French only):

https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/sites/default/files/commitments/11d17.pdf

APPEALS

The decision is final. The reviewing courts upheld the decision.

Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal of 30 January 2014 (in French only): appeal dismissed

FIND OUT MORE

What is leniency? https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/fr/quest-ce-que-le-programme-de-clemence

This series is an educational resource for the general public. The presentation of the cartels covered is not intended to be exhaustive, and some information provided in the interviews may lack precision or simplify certain aspects of the cases. Listeners are therefore invited to consult the full text of the relevant decisions, available in French on our website (N.B.: only the French version of the full text of each decision is authentic), as well as, where applicable, any judgments subsequently handed down by the reviewing courts, for a complete and accurate understanding of the context and scope of the information presented.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

EPISODE DESCRIPTION

France’s four leading laundry detergent makers were fined a total of €367.9 million after colluding for nearly six years over the prices and promotional deals offered to supermarket chains.

Guided by journalist Isabelle Souquet, the series features first-hand accounts from investigators at the French Competition Authority, as well as public- and private-sector representatives with knowledge of the cartels.

This podcast was originally produced in French and has been translated into English by the French Competition Authority. All speakers are voiced by professional actors, and all names remain unchanged.

CASE SUMMARY

It all began in 2008, when Unilever reported the existence of the cartel and applied for leniency, securing immunity from fines. In the months that followed, Henkel, Procter & Gamble and Colgate-Palmolive also came forward and were granted reductions in their fines. The French Competition Authority then uncovered a far-reaching cartel covering all laundry detergent brands and formats — powder, liquid and tablets. The companies’ sales directors met secretly three to four times a year in hotels and restaurants in the western suburbs of Paris. Documents seized during the investigation showed the companies used code names to conceal their identities: “Hugues” for Henkel, “Pierre” for Procter & Gamble, “Laurence” or “Louis” for Lever (Unilever), and “Christian” for Colgate. The result? Competition between laundry detergent manufacturers was restricted from 1997 to 2004, with consumers paying higher prices than in a competitive market.

SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE

Pierre Larcher, former case officer at the French Competition Authority

Virginie Beaumeunier, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

Anne Krenzer, Head of the Leniency Unit at the French Competition Authority

Stanislas Martin, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

DECISION (in French only)

https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/sites/default/files/commitments/11d17.pdf

APPEALS

The decision is final. The reviewing courts upheld the decision.

Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal of 30 January 2014 (in French only): appeal dismissed

This series is an educational resource for the general public. The presentation of the cartels covered is not intended to be exhaustive, and some information provided in the interviews may lack precision or simplify certain aspects of the cases. Listeners are therefore invited to consult the full text of the relevant decisions, available in French on our website (N.B.: only the French version of the full text of each decision is authentic), as well as, where applicable, any judgments subsequently handed down by the reviewing courts, for a complete and accurate understanding of the context and scope of the information presented.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

EPISODE DESCRIPTION

France’s four leading laundry detergent makers were fined a total of €367.9 million after colluding for nearly six years over the prices and promotional deals offered to supermarket chains.

Cartels & Cie, a podcast series produced by the French Competition Authority, takes you behind the scenes of some of France’s biggest anticompetitive cases.

Guided by journalist Isabelle Souquet, the series features first-hand accounts from investigators at the French Competition Authority, as well as public- and private-sector representatives with knowledge of the cartels.

This podcast was originally produced in French and has been translated into English by the French Competition Authority. All speakers are voiced by professional actors, and all names remain unchanged.

CASE SUMMARY

It all began in 2008, when Unilever reported the existence of the cartel and applied for leniency, securing immunity from fines. In the months that followed, Henkel, Procter & Gamble and Colgate-Palmolive also came forward and were granted reductions in their fines. The French Competition Authority then uncovered a far-reaching cartel covering all laundry detergent brands and formats — powder, liquid and tablets. The companies’ sales directors met secretly three to four times a year in hotels and restaurants in the western suburbs of Paris. Documents seized during the investigation showed the companies used code names to conceal their identities: “Hugues” for Henkel, “Pierre” for Procter & Gamble, “Laurence” or “Louis” for Lever (Unilever), and “Christian” for Colgate. The result? Competition between laundry detergent manufacturers was restricted from 1997 to 2004, with consumers paying higher prices than in a competitive market.

·      Episode 1 – Secret Meetings and Codenames

·      Episode 2 – The Beginning of the End

·      Episode 3 – First In, First Out Clean

SPEAKERS IN ORDER OF APPEARANCE

Pierre Larcher, former case officer at the French Competition Authority

Virginie Beaumeunier, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

Anne Krenzer, Head of the Leniency Unit at the French Competition Authority

Stanislas Martin, former General Rapporteur at the French Competition Authority

DECISION (in French only)

https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/sites/default/files/commitments/11d17.pdf

APPEALS

The decision is final. The reviewing courts upheld the decision.

Judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal of 30 January 2014 (in French only): appeal dismissed

This series is an educational resource for the general public. The presentation of the cartels covered is not intended to be exhaustive, and some information provided in the interviews may lack precision or simplify certain aspects of the cases. Listeners are therefore invited to consult the full text of the relevant decisions, available in French on our website (N.B.: only the French version of the full text of each decision is authentic), as well as, where applicable, any judgments subsequently handed down by the reviewing courts, for a complete and accurate understanding of the context and scope of the information presented.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Tout commence par des signaux faibles et des indices convergents qui intriguent la DGCCRF, laquelle décide de transmettre le dossier à l’Autorité de la concurrence. Dès lors, l’enquête s’accélère : des perquisitions sont menées. Notes manuscrites, présentations, tableaux et documents internes sont saisis. Les investigations révèlent alors une entente nationale, six grands acteurs : BSH, Candy Hoover, Electrolux, Indesit, Whirlpool et Eberhardt Frères (distributeur de la marque Liebherr), se sont concertés pour coordonner des hausses de prix de vente conseillés.

Ces échanges, organisés au plus haut niveau des entreprises, avaient lieu lors de réunions secrètes, parfois en marge de rencontres du GIFAM, parfois dans des restaurants, afin de s’accorder à l’abri des regards. L’enquête mettra aussi en lumière une seconde concertation, visant à modifier les conditions commerciales appliquées aux cuisinistes, notamment pour les modèles d’exposition. Ces pratiques ont finalement pesé sur les consommateurs. L’Autorité a sanctionné l’ensemble des entreprises impliquées.

Avec

• Joël Tozzi, conseiller en concurrence et régulation des marchés à la DGCCRF, Rapporteur général adjoint à l’Autorité, en charge du pilotage de l’instruction à l’époque

• Amel Cheikh-Braun, rapporteure sur le dossier à l’Autorité

• Erwann Kerguelen, rapporteur général adjoint à l’Autorité et rapporteur sur le dossier à l’époque

Réalisation : Insider Podcast

Journaliste : Clara Garnier-Amouroux

DECISION INTEGRALE 

Décision 18-D-24 du 05 décembre 2018

COMMUNIQUÉ DE PRESSE

L'Autorité sanctionne six fabricants d'électroménager, parmi les plus importants du secteur, à hauteur de 189 M€ pour s'être, notamment, concertés sur des hausses de prix

RECOURS ET POURVOIS

Cette décision est définitive, elle n’a fait l’objet d’aucun recours dans les délais légaux.

Il est fait référence à la décision 24-D-11 du 19 décembre 2024, laquelle fait l’objet d’un recours.

POUR ALLER PLUS LOIN

Voir notre rubrique dédiée à la procédure de clémence : Qu'est-ce que le programme de clémence ?

La coopération entre la DGCCRF et l’Autorité de la concurrence : https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/fr/video/charte-de-cooperation-adlc-dgccrf

Cette série constitue un support pédagogique qui a vocation à informer le grand public. La présentation des cartels concernés ne prétend pas à l’exhaustivité et les témoignages recueillis peuvent par ailleurs manquer de précision ou emprunter certains raccourcis de langage. L’Autorité invite les auditeurs à consulter les décisions dans leur version intégrale ainsi que les arrêts des juridictions de contrôle, le cas échéant, pour apprécier de façon exacte le contexte et la portée des informations présentées.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Tout commence par des signaux faibles et des indices convergents qui intriguent la DGCCRF, laquelle décide de transmettre le dossier à l’Autorité de la concurrence. Dès lors, l’enquête s’accélère : des perquisitions sont menées. Notes manuscrites, présentations, tableaux et documents internes sont saisis. Les investigations révèlent alors une entente nationale, six grands acteurs : BSH, Candy Hoover, Electrolux, Indesit, Whirlpool et Eberhardt Frères (distributeur de la marque Liebherr), se sont concertés pour coordonner des hausses de prix de vente conseillés.

Ces échanges, organisés au plus haut niveau des entreprises, avaient lieu lors de réunions secrètes, parfois en marge de rencontres du GIFAM, parfois dans des restaurants, afin de s’accorder à l’abri des regards. L’enquête mettra aussi en lumière une seconde concertation, visant à modifier les conditions commerciales appliquées aux cuisinistes, notamment pour les modèles d’exposition. Ces pratiques ont finalement pesé sur les consommateurs. L’Autorité a sanctionné l’ensemble des entreprises impliquées.

Avec

• Joël Tozzi, conseiller en concurrence et régulation des marchés à la DGCCRF, Rapporteur général adjoint à l’Autorité, en charge du pilotage de l’instruction à l’époque

• Amel Cheikh-Braun, rapporteure sur le dossier à l’Autorité

• Erwann Kerguelen, rapporteur général adjoint à l’Autorité et rapporteur sur le dossier à l’époque

Réalisation : Insider Podcast

Journaliste : Clara Garnier-Amouroux

DECISION INTEGRALE 

Décision 18-D-24 du 05 décembre 2018

COMMUNIQUÉ DE PRESSE

L'Autorité sanctionne six fabricants d'électroménager, parmi les plus importants du secteur, à hauteur de 189 M€ pour s'être, notamment, concertés sur des hausses de prix

RECOURS ET POURVOIS

Cette décision est définitive, elle n’a fait l’objet d’aucun recours dans les délais légaux.

Il est fait référence à la décision 24-D-11 du 19 décembre 2024, laquelle fait l’objet d’un recours.

POUR ALLER PLUS LOIN

Voir notre rubrique dédiée à la procédure de clémence : Qu'est-ce que le programme de clémence ?

La coopération entre la DGCCRF et l’Autorité de la concurrence : https://www.autoritedelaconcurrence.fr/fr/video/charte-de-cooperation-adlc-dgccrf

Cette série constitue un support pédagogique qui a vocation à informer le grand public. La présentation des cartels concernés ne prétend pas à l’exhaustivité et les témoignages recueillis peuvent par ailleurs manquer de précision ou emprunter certains raccourcis de langage. L’Autorité invite les auditeurs à consulter les décisions dans leur version intégrale ainsi que les arrêts des juridictions de contrôle, le cas échéant, pour apprécier de façon exacte le contexte et la portée des informations présentées.

Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.