Pierre Chellet is an associate in the Paris office of Hogan Lovells. He advises on all aspects of EU and French competition law. He helps clients in investigations and proceedings before competition and regulatory authorities in France and at the EU level. From August 2020 to July 2021 he was an Academic Assistant at the College of Europe in Bruges, European Legal Studies Department. Pierre Chellet holds an LL.M in EU Law from the College of Europe (2018-19 Manuel MARÍN promotion) and a Master’s degree in Economic Law from Sciences Po (Paris). He also studied public affairs at University of California Los Angeles (UCLA). Prior to joining the College of Europe, Pierre Chellet interned in several French and international law firms in Paris, where he focused on EU and French competition law.
163
With summer kicking in, it may be tempting to enjoy a Portuguese beer and relax far from competition law. Instead, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) choses to recall the basics of resale price maintenance (“RPM”) and Article 101 TFEU with the Super Bock judgment (Judgment of the ECJ of (...)
297
On 16 March 2023, in a preliminary ruling issued in the Towercast case, the Court of Justice ruled that a concentration below national merger control thresholds could be subject to a review under article 102 TFUE. This much awaited judgment is a revival of the 1973 Court of Justice’s (...)
29
Brief summary of facts In 2007, the Commission found that several elevator and escalator manufacturers had formed a cartel in Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. In 2008, the Austrian Courts reached the same finding regarding the Austrian market. In 2010, the Land (...)
30
Brief summary of facts In 2016, the Commission found that fifteen trucks manufacturers, including German based DAF Trucks, had colluded to distort competition in the European Economic Area. Tibor-Trans, a Hungarian national and international freight company, had purchased several trucks to (...)
27
Brief summary of facts In June 2013, the Portuguese Competition Authority (“PCA”) found that Sport TV Portugal had abused of its dominant position in the market of premium sports TV channels. This behaviour infringed national law and Article 102 TFEU. Consequently, the PCA imposed a fine of (...)
34
Brief summary of facts In 2004, the Finish Competition Authority found that several companies had participated in a cartel relating to asphalt in Finland between 1994 and 2002. It proposed fines which were ultimately adopted by the Finish Supreme Administrative Court in 2009. In the (...)
27
Brief summary of facts eBizcuss became an Apple authorized reseller in 2002 pursuant to an agreement which included the following jurisdiction clause: “This Agreement and the corresponding relationship between the parties shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the (...)
91
Brief summary of facts In 2006, the Latvian Competition Council found that Riga Airport had abused of its dominant position by applying discriminatory discounts to the benefit of two airlines, including Latvian Air Baltic. flyLAL was a Lithuanian airline which faced fierce competition from (...)
32
Brief summary of facts Repsol, a Spanish oil company, concluded gas stations lease agreements for a duration of 25 years. The Commission opened an investigation against Repsol and expressed its concerns that the lease agreements could breach Article 101 TFEU and foreclose the market. (...)
47
Brief summary of facts In 2006, the Commission sanctioned various companies for participating in a cartel relating to hydrogen peroxide and sodium perborate. The Commission found that infringing companies had exchanged information, limited production, allocated markets and fixed prices in (...)
44
Brief summary of facts In 2007, the Commission found that several elevator and escalator manufacturers had formed a cartel in Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. In 2008, the Austrian Courts reached the same finding regarding the Austrian market. ÖBB-Infrastruktur, a (...)
35
Brief summary of facts In 2007, the Commission sanctioned various companies, including Siemens and ABB, for participating in a cartel relating to gas insulated switchgear. Anti-competitive behaviours included bid-rigging, price fixing and market sharing. EnBW is an energy-distribution (...)
49
Brief summary of facts On 26 March 2010, the Oberlandesgericht Wien sanctioned several companies for infringing Article 101 TFEU on the market for wholesale distribution of printing chemicals. Fines amounted to EUR 1.5 million. Although companies appealed, this decision was upheld. The (...)
24
Brief summary of facts On 21 January 2008, the Bundeskartellamt sanctioned three manufacturers of décor paper and five individuals for their involvement in price-fixing and out-put limitation agreements. Fines amounted to EUR 62 million. Pfleiderer was a purchaser of décor paper. It (...)
54
Brief summary of facts In 2000, the Italian Competition Authority (“AGCM”) found that various Italian insurance companies had colluded and exchanged information to coordinate their prices on civil liability auto insurance premiums. Several customers brought actions for compensation before (...)
36
Brief summary of facts In 1991, Mr Crehan, entered into two 20 years agreements with Inntrepreneur Estates Ltd for the leasing of two pubs. The lease agreement included the obligation for Mr. Crehan to buy beer exclusively from Courage Ltd. However, Mr Crehan could not compete with (...)
181
Since the adoption of regulation no. 139/2004, the European Commission (the “Commission”), has been trying to strike the right balance between (i) reviewing transactions that may have an impact on competition within the internal market, and (ii) limiting the administrative burden on companies. (...)
4145
On 1 June 2022, the new Block Exemption Regulation for Vertical Agreements, Regulation 2022/720, and its accompanying guidelines entered into force. It is the result of a lengthy and complex review process that aimed to make the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation fit for the digital age. This (...)
115
On July 7, 2021, U.S. pharmaceutical distribution group McKesson announced the sale of most of its European operations to its German competitor Phoenix. Commission clears the transaction and refers the analysis of the French markets to the French Competition Authority The scope of the (...)
302
On 18 May 2022, the General Court of the European Union rejected Wieland-Werke’s appeal against the European Commission decision to prohibit its proposed acquisition of (i) Aurubis Rolled Products (“ARP”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Aurubis, and (ii) Schwermetall, a 50/50 joint-venture (...)
215
The Illumina/Grail (Case M.10188) saga continues before the European Commission [the “Commission”] and the General Court with fierce confrontation in relation to jurisdictional issues and standstill obligation. This transaction was already set to become an unprecedented case as it is the (...)
247
On 26 March 2021, the European Commission [the "Commission"] published its guidance on merger referrals under Article 22 of Regulation 139/2004 [the "Merger Regulation"]. Contrary to its past practice, the Commission now accepts to review referrals for which neither the national nor the (...)
147
In March 2021, announcement that the European Commission [the “Commission”] would review its assessment of referrals under Article 22 of Regulation n° 139/2004 [the “Merger Regulation”] has attracted much attention from practitioners and academics. Under this new approach, the Commission will (...)
390
Case law on merger control is all the more scrutinised as litigation is rare. However, the year 2020 has enabled the Court of First Instance to rule on several occasions on the application of Regulation 139/2004 by the European Commission in prohibition decisions. In particular, by the CK (...)
Price
€65.00
Grands arrêts du droit de la concurrence - Contrôle des concentrations
