The UK High Court deals with the issue of whether a party could, in national proceedings, rely on conclusions of facts and issues reached by the Commission, the CFI and the EU Court of Justice in related proceedings (Iberia UK / Bpb Industries / British Gypsum)

"The English High Court's Judgment In Iberia U.K. Ltd V (1) Bpb Industries Plc And (2) British Gypsum Ltd"*The facts The defendants (BPB Industries Plc and British Gypsum Ltd) are major suppliers of plasterboard to the UK and for the purposes of Article 86, occupy a dominant position in that market. When the plaintiff (Iberian UK Ltd) began to import cheaper Spanish plasterboard to the UK, the defendants took steps to protect their market. The plaintiff have complained to the Commission of abuse of dominant position by the defendants. Having initiated infringement proceedings, the Commission adopted a decision (89/22) in which it found breaches of Article 86 and imposed fines on both defendants. This decision was subsequently appealed to the CFI [1] and then to the ECJ [2]. In both

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

Quotation

Chris Mitropoulos, The UK High Court deals with the issue of whether a party could, in national proceedings, rely on conclusions of facts and issues reached by the Commission, the CFI and the EU Court of Justice in related proceedings (Iberia UK / Bpb Industries / British Gypsum), 18 April 1996, e-Competitions April 1996, Art. N° 39561

Visites 361

All issues

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