The Stockholm City Court rules that the prohibition against double jeopardy does not bar subsequent administrative proceedings in a case of abuse of dominance where previous civil proceedings led to an injunction order under penalty of a fine (Swedavia)

Admissibility of an action for imposing a competition fine brought after the Market Court ordered injunction under penalty of a fine in related civil proceedings. Exploitative abuse of dominance. Ne bis in idem Background Swedavia is a state-owned company in charge with the administration of public airports in Sweden. At the core of the present dispute between the Swedish Competition Authority and Swedavia we may find an action for an injunction order brought by a civil party and customer of the dominant undertaking. Among other services, Swedavia also provided cab booking under the form of basic or premium services, depending on whether the cab driver could pick the client at the taxi reception desk or directly in the arrivals hall at the customs checking point. The latter service

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • Mircea & Partners (Bucharest)

Quotation

Emanuela Matei, The Stockholm City Court rules that the prohibition against double jeopardy does not bar subsequent administrative proceedings in a case of abuse of dominance where previous civil proceedings led to an injunction order under penalty of a fine (Swedavia), 13 January 2014, e-Competitions Bulletin January 2014, Art. N° 62828

Visites 105

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues