Japan Fair Trade Commission cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order against a subsidiary
First written in FY2017-Q1. 17 of 30 entries say "Restated". Latest entry: FY2025.
1 other company's latest entry also says "Dropped".
- FY2025DroppedAnnual reportThe FY2025 business and other risks section contains no reference to the Japan Fair Trade Commission's orders against ダイレックス株式会社 or the related litigation. This records only the absence of the reference and does not establish that the matter has been resolved.
- FY2025-H1MitigatedAnnual report
「Following the judgment, ダイレックス株式会社 filed a petition with the Supreme Court for acceptance of a final appeal on 7 June 2023. However, the Supreme Court decided not to accept the appeal on 19 September 2024, thereby concluding the litigation concerning the Tokyo High Court judgment. As the surcharge had already been paid, there was no impact on the Company's results or financial position.」
The litigation concerning the Tokyo High Court judgment was reported as having concluded following the Supreme Court's decision not to accept the final appeal. The surcharge had already been paid, and the Company stated that there was no impact on its results or financial position. - FY2024-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「As ダイレックス株式会社 was dissatisfied with the decision, it filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission on 2 April 2020 seeking annulment of the decision. On 26 May 2023, the claim was dismissed. Following the judgment, on 7 June 2023 it filed a petition with the Supreme Court for acceptance of a final appeal.」
The judgment by the Tokyo High Court dismissing the claim and the petition filed with the Supreme Court for acceptance of a final appeal continued to be reported. - FY2024-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「As ダイレックス株式会社 was dissatisfied with the decision, it filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission on 2 April 2020 seeking annulment of the decision. On 26 May 2023, the claim was dismissed. Following the judgment, on 7 June 2023 it filed a petition with the Supreme Court for acceptance of a final appeal.」
The judgment by the Tokyo High Court dismissing the claim and the petition filed with the Supreme Court for acceptance of a final appeal, as reported in the previous quarter, were restated. - FY2024-Q1AdvancedAnnual report
「As ダイレックス株式会社 was dissatisfied with the decision, it filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission on 2 April 2020 seeking annulment of the decision. On 26 May 2023, the claim was dismissed. Following this judgment, on 7 June 2023 ダイレックス株式会社 filed a petition with the Supreme Court for acceptance of a final appeal seeking annulment of the decision.」
The Tokyo High Court dismissed the claim, after which ダイレックス株式会社 filed a petition with the Supreme Court for acceptance of a final appeal. - FY2023DroppedAnnual reportThe FY2023 main text contains no reference to the Japan Fair Trade Commission's cease-and-desist order or surcharge payment order against ダイレックス株式会社, or to the action filed with the Tokyo High Court. This does not establish that the matter has been resolved.
- FY2023-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million.」
The reference to the cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order, ¥1,274 million surcharge, partial refund and action filed with the Tokyo High Court continued to be reported. - FY2023-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million.」
The reference to the cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order, ¥1,274 million surcharge, partial surcharge refund and action filed with the Tokyo High Court continued to be reported. - FY2023-Q1Resumption of disclosureAnnual report
「Japan Fair Trade Commission cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order against a subsidiary The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million.」
The reference to the order, which was not found in the previous consolidated fiscal year's main text, reappeared under “Other.” The partial cancellation and refund of the surcharge and the action filed with the Tokyo High Court continued to be reported. - FY2022DroppedAnnual reportThe FY2022 business and other risks section contains no reference to the Japan Fair Trade Commission's cease-and-desist order or surcharge payment order against ダイレックス株式会社, or to the action filed with the Tokyo High Court. This records only the absence of the reference and does not establish that the matter has been resolved.
- FY2022-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「Following the decision, on 2 April 2020 ダイレックス株式会社 filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission, seeking to have annulled the decision that had cancelled only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The refund of approximately ¥81.95 million and other amounts resulting from partial cancellation of the surcharge payment order, and the filing of an action with the Tokyo High Court seeking annulment of the decision, continued to be reported. - FY2022-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「Following the decision, on 2 April 2020 ダイレックス株式会社 filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission, seeking to have annulled the decision that had cancelled only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The refund of approximately ¥81.95 million and other amounts resulting from partial cancellation of the surcharge payment order, and the filing of an action with the Tokyo High Court seeking annulment of the decision, continued to be reported. - FY2022-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「Following the decision, on 2 April 2020 ダイレックス株式会社 filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission, seeking to have annulled the decision that had cancelled only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The partial refund resulting from the decision and the filing of an action with the Tokyo High Court seeking annulment of the decision continued to be reported. - FY2021-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「Following the decision, on 2 April 2020 ダイレックス株式会社 filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission, seeking to have annulled the decision that had cancelled only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The conclusion of the hearing proceedings, partial cancellation and a refund of approximately ¥81.95 million and other amounts, and the filing of an action with the Tokyo High Court continued to be reported. - FY2021-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「Following the decision, on 2 April 2020 ダイレックス株式会社 filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission, seeking to have annulled the decision that had cancelled only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order.」
The conclusion of the hearing proceedings, partial cancellation and a refund of approximately ¥81.95 million and other amounts, and the filing of an action with the Tokyo High Court were restated. - FY2021-Q1Administrative decision, partial refund and litigationAnnual report
「ダイレックス株式会社 had petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders and had been pursuing the proceedings. The hearing proceedings concluded on 13 June 2018. In its decision dated 25 March 2020, the Japan Fair Trade Commission partially accepted the Company's claims and ordered, among other things, a refund of the ¥81.95 million amount for which cancellation was granted, plus an additional surcharge, from the ¥1,274 million surcharge already paid. The refund was received on 27 March 2020. Following this decision, on 2 April 2020 ダイレックス株式会社 filed an action with the Tokyo High Court against the Japan Fair Trade Commission, seeking to have the decision, which had cancelled only part of the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order, annulled.」
The hearing proceedings concluded, and the decision dated 25 March 2020 partially accepted the Company's claims, resulting in a refund of approximately ¥81.95 million and other amounts, while ダイレックス株式会社 filed an action with the Tokyo High Court seeking annulment of the decision. - FY2020-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order, ¥1,274 million surcharge and ongoing hearing proceedings were restated. - FY2020-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order against the subsidiary, the ¥1,274 million surcharge and the ongoing hearing proceedings were restated. - FY2020-Q1Resumption of disclosureAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The reference to the cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order, which was not found in the previous consolidated fiscal year's main text, reappeared, together with the ¥1,274 million surcharge and the ongoing hearing proceedings. - FY2019DroppedAnnual reportThe FY2019 main text contains no reference to the Japan Fair Trade Commission's cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order or ongoing hearing proceedings concerning ダイレックス株式会社.
- FY2019-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order against the subsidiary, the ¥1,274 million surcharge and the ongoing hearing proceedings were restated. - FY2019-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order, ¥1,274 million surcharge and ongoing hearing proceedings were restated. The surcharge was recorded as an extraordinary loss for the fiscal year ended March 2014. - FY2019-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order, ¥1,274 million surcharge and ongoing hearing proceedings were restated. - FY2018DroppedAnnual reportThe FY2018 main text contains no reference to the Japan Fair Trade Commission's cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order or ongoing hearing proceedings concerning ダイレックス株式会社.
- FY2018-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The cease-and-desist order and surcharge payment order against the subsidiary, the ¥1,274 million surcharge and the ongoing hearing proceedings were restated. - FY2018-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order, ¥1,274 million surcharge and ongoing hearing proceedings were restated. - FY2018-Q1Resumption of disclosureAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million.」
The reference to the cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order and ongoing hearing proceedings, which was not found in the previous fiscal year's main text, was again included under “Other” this quarter. The ¥1,274 million surcharge had already been recorded as an extraordinary loss for the fiscal year ended March 2014. - FY2017DroppedAnnual reportThe FY2017 main text contains no reference to the Japan Fair Trade Commission's cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order or ongoing hearing proceedings concerning ダイレックス株式会社.
- FY2017-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million. After carefully and thoroughly reviewing the contents of both orders, the Company identified differences in its understanding and views, and on 5 June 2014 petitioned the Japan Fair Trade Commission for a hearing regarding both orders pursuant to Article 49, paragraph 6 and Article 50, paragraph 4 of the Antimonopoly Act. The hearing proceedings were ongoing.」
The cease-and-desist order, surcharge payment order and ongoing hearing proceedings against the subsidiary were restated. The ¥1,274 million surcharge had already been recorded as an extraordinary loss for the fiscal year ended March 2014. - FY2017-Q1MaterialisedAnnual report
「The Company's subsidiary, ダイレックス株式会社, received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission dated 5 June 2014 for conduct constituting 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 surcharge payable was ¥1,274 million.」
The subsidiary received a cease-and-desist order and a surcharge payment order, with the surcharge amounting to ¥1,274 million. The Company petitioned for a hearing regarding both orders, and the hearing proceedings were ongoing.