An appeal against cartel charges by General Quimica and its parent companies was dismissed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 20 January 2011. The central issue in the appeal was that the test used by the General Court for attributing responsibility for a parent company for the actions of a subsidiary. The ECJ upheld the General Court’s finding that where a parent company holds 100 per cent of the capital of its subsidiary, there is a rebuttable presumption that the parent company exercises decisive influence over its subsidiary’s conduct. This would also be the case where the relationship is indirect because of the interposition of another company between the parent and ultimate subsidiary. The appellants were successful in claiming that the General Court had failed to sufficiently explain the reasons why it considered that the order given by Repsol Quimica to its subsidiary General Quimica to cease any practice which may constitute an infringement might constitute evidence of decisive influence. The ECJ concurred that the General Court should have gone further than assert a principle without setting out the basis for its conclusions.