Traces how the Court of Justice built the association-of-undertakings doctrine: from FRUBO (1975) and Van Landewyck (FEDETAB), paras 88–90 (“also non-profit associations; recommendation = decision if faithful expression of members’ resolve”), through IAZ, BNIC v Clair, para 17 (“legal framework / public-law status irrelevant”), Binon v AMP / NSO (joint agency + retailers’ association), Verband der Sachversicherer (non-binding recommendation = decision), the state-delegation test (Meng → Reiff / Delta / DIP / Spediporto → CNSD → Arduino / CIF / API), the professional-bodies line (CNSD → Pavlov → Albany → Wouters → Arduino → OTOC → Geologi → FNV → CHEZ → Lietuvos → Em akaunt, plus Doulamis), trade cartels via associations (Gøttrup-Klim / FEG / BIDS / Consorzio), payment systems (MasterCard (GC + ECJ) / Cartes Bancaires (GC + ECJ) / Slovak Banks / Budapest Bank / Banco BPN 2024) and sport regulators (Piau (GC + ECJ) → Meca-Medina → MOTOE → ISU (GC + ECJ) / Superleague / Royal Antwerp). Earliest case on top, latest on bottom — ordered by exact judgment date (day precision). Arrows run from a later case to the earlier case it cites on the association point. Click any case to bold all directly connected cases.
Sources: Court of Justice — InfoCuria (curia.europa.eu) and EUR-Lex (eur-lex.europa.eu). Every node links to both its EUR-Lex judgment and its InfoCuria file. Edge labels are the citing paragraphs on the association notion — verifiable in the EUR-Lex “Grounds”.