Swiss Federal Supreme Court Confirms
that Swiss Act on Cartels also captures
single and continuous infringements

In the Engadin I case, several construction companies had concluded multiple bid-rigging agreements, among others during the period from 2008 to 2012. The Competition Commission (COMCO) and the Federal Administrative Court held that these instances of conduct together constituted a so-called overall agreement (Gesamtabrede). Accordingly, the construction companies were sanctioned for an overall agreement spanning the period from 2008 to 2012. One of the appellants disputed whether the concept of the overall agreement exists in Swiss competition law (i.e. argued that this concept was not captured by the definition of "agreement" pursuant to Article 4(1) of the Cartel Act (CartA)). The Federal Supreme Court rejected this view and held that the concept of an overall agreement is captured by the definition of "agreement" under Article 4(1) CartA.

Also, for the first time, the Federal Supreme Court clarified the conditions under which consortia are permissible.