The case concerns top-slices rebates, as abusive practices under 102(2)(b) and 102(2)(c)TFEU. The judgment is in line with the previous case-law, reinforcing that a dominant undertaking has a special responsibility not to eliminate the residual competition. Solvay’s arguments that support the pleas on the absence of a dominant position and of an abuse and concern the structure of its production costs are rejected by the Court. As to the procedural part, the absence of repeated infringements is established by the Court in its finding that collusion and abuse of dominance are not similar types of infringements.