The Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) dismissed the appeal brought by The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow Chemical”), Dow Deutschland Inc., Dow Deutschland Anlagengesellschaft mbH and Dow Europe GmbH (collectively “Dow”) seeking the annulment of the General Court’s (“GC”) judgment, which largely upheld the Commission’s decision to impose fines totaling EUR 519 million on five groups of companies for participating in illegal price-fixing and market-sharing cartel in the synthetic rubber market in violation of Article 101 of the TFEU. In its decision of November 2006, the Commission imposed a fine of approximately EUR 65 million on Dow Chemical, EUR 60 million of which was payable jointly and severally with Dow Deutschland Inc., and EUR 47 million of which was payable jointly and severally with Dow Deutschland Anlagengesellschaft mbH and Dow Europe GmbH for their direct participation in the cartel. Dow Deutschland Inc., Dow Deutschland Anlagengesellschaft and Dow Europe are wholly controlled, directly or indirectly, by Dow Chemical. In its appeal to the ECJ, Dow particularly challenged the GC’s assessment of the attribution of liability to Dow Chemical as the parent company. The ECJ found that the GC had been correct in holding that the Commission had been entitled to impute liability for the infringement to the parent company, Dow Chemical. The ECJ stated that the only circumstances in which the Commission would have been justified in not imposing a fine on Dow Chemical would have been if there had been objective reasons capable of justifying a departure from the principles laid down in Article 101 TFEU and if that decision would not have led to preferential treatment of Dow Chemical as compared with other parent companies involved in the infringement in question. The ECJ found that these conditions were not satisfied in this case. In particular, the ECJ noted that the mere fact that Dow Chemical runs a risk of civil litigation in the US cannot make it justifiable for the Commission to refrain from imposing a fine. Further, all other parent and ultimate parent companies were held liable for their subsidiaries’ infringements in the case and, thus, the Commission would have breached the principle of equal treatment if it had considered the possibility of such economic damage only in relation to Down Chemical. The ECJ also dismissed all other claims made by Dow. Source: Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union, Case C-499/11 P, The Dow Chemical Company and others v Commission, 18/07/2013