Administrative Orders and Tribunal Proceedings Concerning Abuse of a Superior Bargaining Position
First written in FY2016. 24 of 29 entries say "Restated". Latest entry: FY2026-H1.
No other company in this theme has enough history to compare yet.
- FY2026-H1Progression to a judgment and appeal in an action to revoke the hearing decisionAnnual report
「Following this hearing decision, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court on 1 November 2019 against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order. On 12 September 2025, a judgment dismissing the claims was issued. The Company determined that the judgment was unjust and, on 26 September 2025, filed an appeal with the Supreme Court and a petition for acceptance of the appeal.」
The Tokyo High Court issued a judgment dismissing the claims, after which the case proceeded to an appeal to the Supreme Court and a petition for acceptance of the appeal. - FY2025-H1RestatedAnnual report
「Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The legal status was reconfirmed: the Company had received a cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order concerning abuse of superior bargaining position, part of the surcharge had been refunded, and an action had been filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision. - FY2024-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「On 16 February 2012, the Company received from the Japan Fair Trade Commission a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting abuse of superior bargaining position under Article 2, paragraph 9, item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of the Act. The Company had requested a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act and had been pursuing the proceedings. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018. On 2 October 2019, a hearing decision was issued recognizing part of the Company's claims, including a decision to refund the amount of ¥1,015 million for which rescission had been granted, plus an additional payment, from the surcharge of ¥4,047 million already paid. The Company received the refund on 4 October 2019. Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The previous legal status was reconfirmed: the Company had received a cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order, part of the surcharge had been refunded, and an action had been filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision. - FY2024-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「On 16 February 2012, the Company received from the Japan Fair Trade Commission a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting abuse of superior bargaining position under Article 2, paragraph 9, item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of the Act. The Company had requested a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act and had been pursuing the proceedings. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018. On 2 October 2019, a hearing decision was issued recognizing part of the Company's claims, including a decision to refund the amount of ¥1,015 million for which rescission had been granted, plus an additional payment, from the surcharge of ¥4,047 million already paid. The Company received the refund on 4 October 2019. Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action seeking rescission of the hearing decision filed with the Tokyo High Court remained pending. - FY2024-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action seeking rescission of the hearing decision filed with the Tokyo High Court remained pending. - FY2023RestatedAnnual report
「Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision remained pending. - FY2023-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「On 16 February 2012, the Company received from the Japan Fair Trade Commission a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting abuse of superior bargaining position under Article 2, paragraph 9, item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of the Act. The Company had requested a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act and had been pursuing the proceedings. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018. On 2 October 2019, a hearing decision was issued recognizing part of the Company's claims, including a decision to refund the amount of ¥1,015 million for which rescission had been granted, plus an additional payment, from the surcharge of ¥4,047 million already paid. The Company received the refund on 4 October 2019. Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action seeking rescission of the hearing decision filed with the Tokyo High Court remained pending. - FY2023-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「On 16 February 2012, the Company received from the Japan Fair Trade Commission a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting abuse of superior bargaining position under Article 2, paragraph 9, item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of the Act. The Company had requested a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act and had been pursuing the proceedings. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018. On 2 October 2019, a hearing decision was issued recognizing part of the Company's claims, including a decision to refund the amount of ¥1,015 million for which rescission had been granted, plus an additional payment, from the surcharge of ¥4,047 million already paid. The Company received the refund on 4 October 2019. Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision remained pending. - FY2022-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision remained pending. - FY2022-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision remained pending. - FY2022-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「On 16 February 2012, the Company received from the Japan Fair Trade Commission a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting abuse of superior bargaining position under Article 2, paragraph 9, item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of the Act.」
The previous legal status was reconfirmed: the Company had received a cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order concerning abuse of superior bargaining position, part of the surcharge had been refunded, and an action had been filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision. - FY2021RestatedAnnual report
「Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision remained pending. - FY2021-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The status was reconfirmed that, following a partial refund of the surcharge, the action filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision remained pending. - FY2021-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「The Company had requested a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act and had been pursuing the proceedings. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018. On 2 October 2019, a hearing decision was issued recognizing part of the Company's claims, including a decision to refund the amount of ¥1,015 million for which rescission had been granted, plus an additional payment, from the surcharge of ¥4,047 million already paid. The Company received the refund on 4 October 2019. Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The previous legal status was reconfirmed: the hearing had been concluded, part of the surcharge had been refunded, and an action had been filed with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision. - FY2020Hearing decision, refund and filing of action for rescissionAnnual report
「The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018. On 2 October 2019, a hearing decision was issued recognizing part of the Company's claims, including a decision to refund the amount of ¥1,015 million for which rescission had been granted, plus an additional payment, from the surcharge of ¥4,047 million already paid. The Company received the refund on 4 October 2019. Following this hearing decision, on 1 November 2019, the Company filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission seeking rescission of the hearing decision, which had rescinded only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
Following conclusion of the hearing, the Company received a refund of ¥1,015 million and other amounts from the surcharge of ¥4,047 million, and filed an action with the Tokyo High Court seeking rescission of the hearing decision. - FY2020-Q2Progress toward the hearing decision and action for rescissionAnnual report
「On 16 February 2012, the Japan Fair Trade Commission issued the Company a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order under the Act on Prohibition of Private Monopolization and Maintenance of Fair Trade. In response, the Company paid the full surcharge of ¥4,047 million in fiscal 2012. In response, the Company paid the full surcharge of ¥4,047 million in fiscal 2012.」
A hearing decision was issued on 2 October 2019, and the Company received a refund of ¥1,015 million and an additional payment following the partial rescission of the surcharge payment order. The Company subsequently filed an action with the Tokyo High Court on 1 November 2019 seeking rescission of the hearing decision. - FY2020-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「The Company decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act, and a decision to commence the hearing proceedings was made on 24 April 2012. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018, but the date of the hearing decision remains undetermined.」
The status was reconfirmed that the hearing concerning the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order for abuse of superior bargaining position had been concluded, while the date of the hearing decision remained undetermined. - FY2019-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「The Company decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act, and a decision to commence the hearing proceedings was made on 24 April 2012. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018, but the date of the hearing decision remains undetermined.」
The status was reconfirmed that the hearing concerning the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order for abuse of superior bargaining position had been concluded, while the date of the hearing decision remained undetermined. - FY2019-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「On 16 February 2012, the Company received from the Japan Fair Trade Commission a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting abuse of superior bargaining position under Article 2, paragraph 9, item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of the Act. The Company decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act, and a decision to commence the hearing proceedings was made on 24 April 2012. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018, but the date of the hearing decision remains undetermined.」
The status was reconfirmed that the hearing concerning the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order for abuse of superior bargaining position had been concluded, while the date of the hearing decision remained undetermined. - FY2019-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「On 16 February 2012, the Company received from the Japan Fair Trade Commission a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting abuse of superior bargaining position under Article 2, paragraph 9, item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of the Act. The Company decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission concerning both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act, and a decision to commence the hearing proceedings was made on 24 April 2012. The hearing was concluded on 20 March 2018, but the date of the hearing decision remains undetermined.」
The status was reconfirmed that the hearing concerning the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order for abuse of superior bargaining position had been concluded, while the date of the hearing decision remained undetermined. - FY2018Conclusion of the hearingAnnual report
「The hearing concluded on 20 March 2018, but the timing of the hearing decision has not yet been determined.」
The hearing on the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order concerning abuse of superior bargaining position was concluded, but the date of the hearing decision was stated to be undetermined. - FY2018-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「The Company received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 16 February 2012, on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting an abuse of a superior bargaining position under Article 2, Paragraph 9, Item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of that Act. It also decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, Paragraph 6 and Article 50, Paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. A decision to commence the hearing proceedings was issued on 24 April 2012, and the hearing remains ongoing.」
The disclosure reconfirmed the status of the cease-and-desist and surcharge payment orders concerning abuse of a superior bargaining position and the ongoing hearing. - FY2018-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Company received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 16 February 2012, on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting an abuse of a superior bargaining position under Article 2, Paragraph 9, Item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of that Act. It also decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, Paragraph 6 and Article 50, Paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. A decision to commence the hearing proceedings was issued on 24 April 2012, and the hearing remains ongoing.」
The disclosure reconfirmed the status of the cease-and-desist and surcharge payment orders concerning abuse of a superior bargaining position and the ongoing hearing. - FY2018-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「The Company received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 16 February 2012, on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting an abuse of a superior bargaining position under Article 2, Paragraph 9, Item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of that Act. It also decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, Paragraph 6 and Article 50, Paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. A decision to commence the hearing proceedings was issued on 24 April 2012, and the hearing remains ongoing.」
The disclosure reconfirmed the status of the cease-and-desist and surcharge payment orders concerning abuse of a superior bargaining position and the ongoing hearing. - FY2017RestatedAnnual report
「Regarding both orders, the Company decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission pursuant to Article 49, Paragraph 6 and Article 50, Paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. A decision to commence the hearing proceedings was issued on 24 April 2012, and the hearing remains ongoing.」
The disclosure reiterated the status of the cease-and-desist and surcharge payment orders concerning abuse of a superior bargaining position and the ongoing hearing. - FY2017-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「The Company received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 16 February 2012, on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting an abuse of a superior bargaining position under Article 2, Paragraph 9, Item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of that Act. It also decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, Paragraph 6 and Article 50, Paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. A decision to commence the hearing proceedings was issued on 24 April 2012, and the hearing remains ongoing.」
The disclosure reiterated that the hearing concerning the cease-and-desist and surcharge payment orders was ongoing. - FY2017-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Company received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 16 February 2012, on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting an abuse of a superior bargaining position under Article 2, Paragraph 9, Item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of that Act. It also decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, Paragraph 6 and Article 50, Paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. A decision to commence the hearing proceedings was issued on 24 April 2012, and the hearing remains ongoing.」
The disclosure reiterated that the hearing concerning the cease-and-desist and surcharge payment orders was ongoing. - FY2017-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「The Company received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 16 February 2012, on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting an abuse of a superior bargaining position under Article 2, Paragraph 9, Item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of that Act. It also decided to request a hearing before the Japan Fair Trade Commission regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, Paragraph 6 and Article 50, Paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. A decision to commence the hearing proceedings was issued on 24 April 2012, and the hearing remains ongoing.」
The disclosure reiterated that the hearing concerning the cease-and-desist and surcharge payment orders was ongoing. - FY2016MaterialisedAnnual report
「The Company received an administrative cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 16 February 2012, on the grounds that it had engaged in conduct constituting an abuse of a superior bargaining position under Article 2, Paragraph 9, Item 5 of the Antimonopoly Act and violating Article 19 of that Act.」
The disclosure covered the previous cease-and-desist and surcharge payment orders and stated that a hearing concerning those orders was ongoing.