The Court holds that the Court of First Instance neither distorted the evidence nor made a manifest error of assessment in finding that the documents relied on by the Commission constituted sufficient evidence of the existence of an agreement between Activision Blizzard and Nintendo which was contrary to EU law.

110. Stresses that, with a view to fulfilling its international human rights commitments, the EU should include, taking account of the nature of the agreements and the situation specific to each partner country, systematic clauses relating to democracy, the rule of law and human rights, as well as social and environmental standards; considers that these clauses should allow the Commission to suspend at least temporarily trade advantages, including those stemming from free trade agreements, if sufficient evidence of human rights – including labour rights – violations is found, either on its own initiative or at the request of a Member St ...[+++]ate or the European Parliament; considers that, at all events, the EU should clearly indicate the appropriate penalties which could be applied to non-EU countries that commit serious human rights violations, and should apply them; reiterates yet again its call for the Commission, the Council and, in particular the HR/VP of the Commission, to render effective the human rights clauses in the international agreements in force and consequently to establish a procedure for effective implementation of these clauses in the spirit of Articles 8, 9 and 96 of the Cotonou Agreement;

3. Notes in relation to the Court of Auditor's findings at paragraph 9.7 of its annual report concerning the transfer of part of staff emoluments with the application of a weighting coefficient the significant number of cases not supported by adequate evidence of the officials' right to the transfers requested; notes that according to information provided by the EESC corrective measures were taken in 2005;

3. Notes in relation to the Court of Auditor's findings at paragraph 9.7 of its annual report concerning the transfer of part of staff emoluments with the application of a weighting coefficient the significant number of cases not supported by adequate evidence of the officials' right to the transfers requested; notes that according to information provided by the EESC corrective measures were taken in 2005;

3. Notes in relation to the Court of Auditor's findings at paragraph 9.7 of its Annual Report concerning the transfer of part of staff emoluments with the application of a weighting coefficient the significant number of cases which were not supported by adequate evidence of the officials' right to the transfers requested; notes that according to information provided by the EESC corrective measures were taken in 2005;

However, the Commission does not recommend more far-reaching options, such as an automatic right to discovery, which could lead to procedural abuses, where defendants settle merely to avoid the heavy costs that excessive wide-ranging discovery, can create. Evidence of final decisions: to avoid the time and cost of re-litigation, the Commission recommends, as is already the case for Commission decisions, that final infringement decisions of Member States' competition authorities should be considered sufficient proof of an infringement ...[+++]in subsequent actions for damages.