Barbara Monti is Senior Legal Counsel for Toyota Motor Europe, based in the company’s Brussels office. Previously, she gained several years of experience working as a French and EU competition law associate in the Brussels office of a leading international law firm and in the Paris office of France’s largest business law firm. Her practice focused on the technology, internet, consumer brands, and energy sectors including renewable energy, market manipulation, and abuse of dominant position. She regularly counseled on vertical agreements and merger control.
129
On 21 June 2022, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) announced that it accepted Google’s commitments related to compensating French publishers for the use of their journalistic content in a range of Google’s services. This brings to an end the FCA’s investigation into Google’s alleged (...)
100
On 16 June 2022, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) announced that it accepted Meta’s commitments related to practices that would have raise competition concerns in the French market for non-search related online advertising. This clarifies the conditions of access to Meta’s partnership (...)
133
On 15 June 2022, the General Court of the European Union (“GC”) upheld all of Qualcomm’s arguments and therefore annulled the decision of the European Commission (“Commission”) fining Qualcomm € 1 billion for abuse of dominant position on the Long-Term Evolution (“LTE”) chipsets market. In (...)
118
On 31 March 2022, the CMA published one of its longest decisions (1077 pages), in which it imposed fines of £155 million on Accord-UK (previously Auden McKenzie/Actavis) for excessive price increases on hydrocortisone tablets after they were de-branded and fell outside the UK NHS price (...)
78
On 24 March 2022, an Italian administrative court (“TAR Lazio” or “court”) annulled the Italian Competition Authority (“ICA”) decision imposing a fine of €10.8 million on several companies belonging to the music ticketing and marketing group CTS Eventim-TicketOne (“TicketOne”) for abuse of its (...)
255
Gazprom: General Court confirms Commission’s commitment decision but annuls a decision based on similar grounds to reject a complaint against Gazprom On 2 February 2022, the General Court of the European Union (the “Court”) issued two judgments which follow the European Commission’s (the (...)
396
On 15 December 2021, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) published the non-confidential version of its decision in Advanz Pharma, which provides further insight into its approach to dealing with excessive pricing. As reported earlier (See Michael Clancy, Samuel Hall, Peter (...)
526
On 9 December 2021, the Italian Competition Authority (“ICA”) adopted a decision finding that the Amazon group (“Amazon”) had violated Article 102 TFEU and harmed competing providers of e-commerce logistics services by tying the right of retailers on the Amazon marketplace to participate in (...)
523
On 10 November 2021, the European General Court (“EGC” or “Court”) delivered its landmark Google Shopping judgment, the first judicial pronouncement on “self-preferencing” as a viable theory of harm under Article 102 TFEU. The EGC fully endorsed the European Commission’s (“Commission”) (...)
261
On 31 March 2022, the CMA published one of its longest decisions (1077 pages), in which it imposed fines of £155 million on Accord-UK (previously Auden McKenzie/Actavis) for excessive price increases on hydrocortisone tablets after they were de-branded and fell outside the UK NHS price (...)
286
Back in 2020, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) had announced, in its annual priorities, its interest in the competition implications of the digital revolution in the financial sector, notably in the context of the growth of FinTech, the introduction of blockchain technology and the (...)
119
The French Competition Authority (“FCA”) prohibited the proposed acquisition of the hypermarket retailer Géant Casino by its competitor E.Leclerc in the French city of Troyes. It found that the transaction would create a duopoly between the two remaining hypermarkets, Carrefour and E.Leclerc, (...)
185
At a time when COVID-19 is having direct and indirect effects on the reduction of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions and ensuing global warming, eight French regulators, including the French Competition Authority, issued on 5 May 2020 a joint working paper in which they highlight the need to (...)
43
On 2 December 2021, the Paris Court of Appeal overturned the 2010 decision of the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) fining eleven banks a total of € 384.9 million for agreeing on interbank fees during the transition to a new digital cheque processing system. As the Paris Court of Appeal (...)
109
The judgment under review comes against a backdrop of sharply rising prices on the wholesale electricity market, and follows a complaint lodged by UNSA Energie with the Commission. The complaint was directed against the adoption, in France, of Decree no. 2022-342 and Orders, which allow for an (...)
149
The judgment under review deals, for the first time, with the legality of a request for information containing search terms to be used made on the basis of Article 18 of Regulation 1/2003, on the one hand, and the legality of a virtual data room procedure for documents containing sensitive (...)
105
In this judgment, the Court of First Instance revisits its full jurisdiction and the consequences of the annulment of a fine imposed by the Commission. In June 2010, the European Commission sanctioned several prestressing steel suppliers, including the applicants, for quota fixing, customer (...)
94
At the end of four particularly detailed rulings, the Court of First Instance reviewed the conditions under which the European Commission can adopt a decision to impose a sanction without infringing the rights of defence or the principle of reasonable time. While twenty years of proceedings (...)
164
In October 2019, the European Commission had rejected the complaint filed by two associations of European or Italian citizens of all professions, experts or enthusiasts in lighting, design against a company active in the lighting sector. According to these two associations, this company would (...)
269
On December 16, 2022, Regulation 1/2003 on the implementation of the competition rules laid down in Articles 101 and 102 TFEU will celebrate its 20th anniversary. The developments of recent years, notably marked by the digitization of the global economy, have led the Commission to launch, on (...)
132
In this case, for the first time, the General Court of the European Union analyzes the impact of systemic or generalized failures of the rule of law in an EU Member State on the determination of which competition authority is best placed to examine a complaint. At the origin of this (...)
177
This case follows the Commission’s decision in the so-called "trucks" cartel (Comm. eur., Sept. 27, 2017, Dec. C(2017) 6467 final, aff. AT.39824 - Trucks). With this decision, it found that several companies belonging to the applicants’ group had violated the antitrust rules. The decision was (...)
124
On the same day, the European Court of First Instance handed down two judgments in the wake of the Commission’s decision concerning certain practices implemented by the Gazprom company. The first judgment, under chronicle, annuls the Commission’s decision rejecting the complaint lodged by a (...)
156
The Commission had fined the applicant for abuse of its dominant position (Eur. Comm., Oct. 15, 2014, Dec. C(2014) 7465 final, Case AT.39523 - Slovak Telekom, corrected by Dec. C(2014) 10119 final and by Dec. C(2015) 2484 final). Although challenging this decision, the applicant had paid the (...)
167
At the beginning of this preliminary ruling, the European Commission had sanctioned 19 legal entities for having coordinated their tariff policies in the air freight sector between 1999 and 2006 (Comm. eur., dec. 17 March 2017, Fret Aérien, AT.39258, OJ C 188, p. 14-19). This decision was (...)
303
The questions raised by the jurisdiction of national courts to hear actions for damages for anti-competitive practices continue to give rise to abundant case law, which nevertheless tends towards greater clarification as to the fate of litigants (see CJEU, 21 May 2015, Cartel Damage Claims (...)
258
The present case once again calls into question the effectiveness of the judicial remedy, particularly in France, available to undertakings which have been the subject of inspections carried out by the European Commission with the assistance of the national competition authority of a Member (...)
279
After three particularly developed judgments, the Court of First Instance returned to the Commission’s powers of inspection, the degree of formalism expected in relation to the evidence on which an inspection decision is based, and the protection of the material seized and the data copied (...)
215
Ten years of proceedings is how long it took to foresee the closure of this case, which allows the Commission to reconsider its powers to reject complaints where, under Article 13(2) of Regulation 1/2003, a complaint is ’already being dealt with by another competition authority’. It all (...)
211
It took 18 years for the European Commission to issue provisional measures on the basis of Article 8 of Regulation No 1/2003. Indeed, the last time the Commission imposed interim measures was in 2001 in the IMS Health case (EC Commission, press release IP/01/941 of 3 July 2001, The Commission (...)
202
On 24 September 2019, the Court of First Instance of the European Union made an order dismissing as inadmissible the action brought by a non-profit-making public body, by reference to the Montessori case-law (CJEU, 6 Nov. 2018, Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori, cases C-622/16 P to C-624/16 (...)
713
Each request for reparation has its own specificity. Here, the absence of a direct contractual link between the victim undertaking and the defendant undertaking allows the Court of Justice of the European Union once again to consider the concept of the ’place where the harmful event occurred (...)
225
Judgments recalling the European Commission’s obligation to state reasons in competition matters are legion. One recalls in particular the recent UPS judgment, in which the Court confirmed the annulment of the Commission’s decision prohibiting a merger on the grounds that the parties had not (...)
357
At the beginning of this preliminary ruling case, a Polish company was sanctioned by the national competition authority for having abused its dominant position on the market for group life insurance, both under national law for the period 2001-2007 and under EU competition rules, but only for (...)
163
In the present case, the Court of First Instance was criticised for dismissing as inadmissible the action brought against a corrective decision, even though the Commission had omitted in its initial decision information concerning the determination of the basic amount of the fine to be imposed (...)
216
Digitisation does not only affect companies. On 19 March 2019, the Commission announced a new secure online tool called eLeniency, which is supposed to guarantee both confidentiality and legal protection, similar to the current oral procedure. Be careful not to mislead, the tool is used in (...)
326
In the field of mergers, there have been few judgments annulling Commission decisions based on violation of the rights of defence. The latest was in 2002, when the Court of First Instance ruled that the lack of clarity and precision of certain Commission objections infringed the rights of (...)
503
The judgments of the ECJ under chronicle bring to a close the judicial saga dating back to February 2006, when the companies of the Gascogne group, Kendrion, ASPLA and Armando Álvarez brought an action before the Court of First Instance to have the Commission’s decision annulled, penalising (...)
Price
€65.00
Grands arrêts du droit de la concurrence - Contrôle des concentrations
Price
€65.00
Grands arrêts du droit de la concurrence - Pratiques anticoncurrentielles - Volume II : Mise en oeuvre
