Florian Bien

Case 3 illustrates the practices of an intermediation platform referencing professionals; The case was studied in the scope of UE, German, French, American, Chinese and Japanese laws. An economist has also shared his point of view. 1. The Moov’ is an intermediation platform with a network (...)

"Europe has the means to develop [world] champions as long as it does not prevent concentrations of its companies against giants like Google or Facebook. We need to build up large European […]groups. This requires a change of approach on the part of the European Commission on the application (...)

The directive on actions for damages for infringements of the competition law has been published on 26 november 2014. This On Topic aims to show the principal issues that arise from the expected implementation of the directive on national laws. Presentation ---- Anne-Sophie Choné-Grimaldi (...)

CA Düsseldorf, 18 Feb. 2015, Az: VI U (Kart) 3/14 - Zement II (Cartel Damage Claims) This note is an extension of the commentary on the judgment of the Düsseldorf Regional Court of 17 December 2013 in the case between the Belgian company specialising in the recovery of damages from victims (...)

In European law, sanctions against infringements of antitrust law primarily concern companies. They are the addressees of the rules laid down in competition law. They alone can be ordered to pay the fines imposed by the European Commission. On the other hand, national legislation also focuses (...)

A case is pending before the German Federal Court of Justice, the outcome of which may have consequences not only for German arbitration but also for international sports arbitration. The case concerns the revision of the judgment in the Pechstein case, named after the plaintiff and famous (...)

The implementation of private actions for damages for violations of competition law is a real challenge for victims. The main difficulties relate mainly to proving the occurrence of damage and its extent. It is clear that it is easier for public authorities than for private individuals to (...)

The decisions of the competition authority do not only concern the economic situation of the respective addressees. They often affect third parties in their legally protected interests. The clearest example comes from merger control. While the approval of such operations by the competition (...)

Regional Court of Düsseldorf, Judgement of 17 December 2013, 37 O 200/09 (Kart.) U. - Zementkartell II (Cement II) Despite a large number of innovations introduced by the 7th and 8th amendments to the Act against Restraints of Competition (Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen - GWB) and (...)

Bundesgerichtshof, 11/12/12 - Az. KVR 7/12 - Puttgarden II An undertaking with a dominant market position is in principle not obliged to share its networks and infrastructure with its competitors. There is, however, one exception highlighted by the so-called "essential facilities" doctrine, (...)

Cologne Regional Court, judgment of 6 February 2013, Phonak v. Federal Republic of Germany, 5 O 86/12 The Cologne Regional Court (Landgericht) is the first German court which, following the judgments of the Court of Justice and the Court of the European Union in Schneider v Legrand (judgment (...)

Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice), 26.02.2013, Grey cement, KRB 20/12 The illegal cement cartels concluded in Germany in the 1990s and the legal debates that followed them constitute an important page in the history of German cartel law. This applies both to the enforcement of (...)

The development of fuel prices at German service stations remains an issue of continuing concern to consumers. Under the eighth amendment of the German Act against Restrictions of Competition, it is planned to amend the German Act against Restrictions of Competition (see Concurrences n° (...)

The principle of double control of joint ventures in German competition law ---- The merger of the companies’ activities into a joint venture may cause two kinds of competition problems. Firstly, there is the change in the market structure resulting from the merger, in particular the (...)

After the final judgment of the Bonn District Court in the Pfleiderer case (see Concurrences n° 2-2012pp. 174-176), the question of access to the documents provided to the Bundeskartellamt under the leniency programme seemed to be practically settled. There appeared to be little need for (...)

Bundestag, 31 May 2012, Draft Bill, Bundestags-Drucksache 17/9852 The German government wants the eighth amendment to the Act against Restraints of Competition to enter into force on 1 January 2013. The first of three readings took place in the Bundestag on 15 June 2012. One of the most (...)

Bundesgerichtshof, 28 Juni 2011, ORWI, Az. KZR 75/10 With the adoption in 2005 of the 7th amendment to the Law against Restrictions of Competition (Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbs¬beschränkungen), the German legislator introduced important innovations designed to make the legal protection of (...)

Amtsgericht Bonn, judgment of 18 January 2012, Pfleiderer, aff. 51 Gs 53/09 The Pfleiderer case has created quite a stir. The enforcement of competition rules by public authorities on the one hand and by private parties on the other risks hampering each other. As a general rule, the easier (...)

Bundeskartellamt, dec. of 12 January 2012, Bundesliga, aff. B 6-114/10 With revenues of more than EUR 400 million per annum, revenue from the sale of match broadcasting rights is one of the most important sources of income for the 36 professional clubs in Germany, hence the interest of the (...)

Bundeskartellamt, Decision of 19 May 2011, case B 3 - 139/10 - Merck Rebate schemes are a widespread form of price discrimination used by dominant firms to foreclose competitors. The European Commission has already taken a number of decisions in relation to such practices, notably in (...)