Judicial Review & Unilateral Practice Research Program

Foreword Judicial review & burden of proof in unilateral practice cases: An overview of EU and national case law

The timing of this latest work in the impressive series of Concurrences projects could hardly have been more apt. 2020 was a bumper year, in both EU and national courts, for judgments involving judicial review of enforcement decisions in unilateral cases. At the same time, however, of the most significant unilateral cases pending before the General Court, three – Intel (on renvoi), Google (shopping) and Google (Android) are, at the time of writing, still in délibéré, with judgments expected later this year or next. Lawyers, economists and, above all, businesses at risk of being regarded as dominant, especially in the digital sector, will be looking to the judgments in these cases, each of which has its distinctive facts, to clarify the analytical framework for determining whether, and specifically why, unilateral conduct of a dominant undertaking crosses the – sometimes all too obscure – line into transgression. It, therefore, seemed to the Editors that, while waiting for these three judgments (and then, in all probability, the results of any appeals), many practitioners might find it useful to look back over recent years to see how the judicial review of decisions of competition authorities, both Commission and national (NCAs), has evolved.

Read more
White & Case (Brussels)
Schibsted (Oslo)
White & Case (Brussels)

Unilateral Practices

The Canadian Competition Authority obtains a court order to advance an investigation of an insurance tech provider over concerns of anticompetitive conduct (Applied Systems)
Canadian Competition Bureau (Gatineau)
Competition Bureau obtains court order to advance an investigation of Applied Systems* The Competition Bureau has obtained a court order to advance a civil investigation into alleged anti-competitive conduct by Applied Systems, Inc. and its affiliates (Applied Systems) including Applied (...)

The EU General Court annuls the Commission’s decision to fine a Bulgarian gas supplier for abuse of dominance by refusing access to strategic gas infrastructures in the country (Bulgarian Energy Holding)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In its Bulgargaz judgment of 25 October 2023, the General Court annulled a 2018 Commission decision finding that the Bulgarian BEH Group – comprised of the State-owned Bulgarian Energy Holding (“BEH”) and its two subsidiaries, the public gas supplier Bulgargaz and the gas transmission network (...)

The EU General Court annuls the Commission Decision which fined a State-owned energy holding company for abusing its dominant position by refusing access to strategic gas infrastructures in Bulgaria (Bulgarian Energy Holding)
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
The General Court annuls the Commission Decision according to which the BEH Group abused its dominant position by refusing access to strategic gas infrastructures in Bulgaria* At the time of the facts, Bulgarian Energy Holding (BEH), a company wholly owned by the Bulgarian State, had several (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal receives a class action claim for £7B in damages against an online search giant for allegedly exploiting its market dominance to charge higher prices (Google / Nikki Stopford)
Hausfeld (London)
,
Hausfeld (London)
,
Hausfeld (London)
A collective claim against Google was filed in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) arguing that the business has used its search engine dominance to shut out competition in mobile search. It is alleged that Google uses its market dominance to raise the prices paid by advertisers for (...)

The Dutch Competition Authority rejects a Big Tech company’s objections to an order for periodic penalty payments that was imposed because of an abuse of dominance infringement (Apple)
Netherlands Authority for Consumers & Markets- ACM (The Hague)
ACM rejects Apple’s objections against order subject to periodic penalty payments* The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) has rejected the objections filed by Apple against the order subject to periodic penalty payments that ACM had previously imposed on the company. In (...)

The Portuguese Court of Appeal upholds the highest-ever fine imposed by the Competition Authority for abuse of dominance in the market for energy supply (EDP Produção)
Portuguese Competition Authority (Lisbon)
Lisbon Court of Appeal upholds highest ever fine for abuse of dominant position* The ruling The Lisbon Court of Appeal (TRL) confirmed EDP Produção’s abuse of a dominant position, sanctioned by the AdC – Portuguese Competition Authority in September 2019. The TRL ruling, dated September (...)

The EU Commission re-imposes fine on a major semiconductor chip manufacturer for allegedly engaging in naked restrictions while an appeal on the case is pending before the EU Court of Justice (Intel)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 22 September 2023, the European Commission (“Commission”) re-imposed a fine of €376.36 million on Intel alleging that it had engaged in three practices aimed at excluding its main competitor at the time, AMD, from the market for computer chips called x86 central processing units (‘CPUs’) in (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s decision and confirms the finding of excessive and unfair pricing of hydrocortisone tablets (Auden McKenzie / Actavis)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 18 September 2023, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal ( CAT ) confirmed in large part a decision of the UK Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA ) which on 23 July 2021 had imposed fines on several hydrocortisone tablet suppliers for, in addition to another infringement, charging (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds a fine against a drugmaker for excessive pricing, for hiking prices over 10,00% (Auden / Actavis)
UK Competition & Markets Authority - CMA (London)
CMA decision upheld in major drug price abuse case* Firms which raised prices for key medicine by over 10,000% from 70p to £72 have had their appeal against a CMA finding of excessive pricing rejected by the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT). The firms must now pay almost £130m in fines. (...)

The EU Commission closes the window to contest designated gatekeeper status and a major technology company appeals the decision before the General Court (Apple)
University Charles III of Madrid
Apple Seeks to Challenge its Designation Under the DMA: Part and Parcel of its Closed Ecosystem Next 16 November 2023, the deadline for the designated gatekeepers on the 5th of September 2023 to appeal the Commission’s decisions will come to an end (for a review of the decisions, see here). (...)

The French Supreme Court allows follow-on damages action by the national health insurance fund in the wake of a major pharmaceutical company’s denigration strategy against rivals (CNAM / Sanofi)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In a judgment dated 30 August 2023, the French Supreme Court rejected an appeal by Sanofi against the award of damages to the Caisse nationale d’assurance maladie des travailleurs salariés, the French national health insurance fund for employees ( CNAM ) (see, attached judgment). The damages (...)

The Argentinian Court of Appeal confirms the extension of the interim measures imposed on a messaging app pending the conclusion of the Competition Authority’s investigation over alleged unilateral practices (WhatsApp)
Argentinian Competition Authority - CNDC (Buenos Aires)
The Court of Appeals confirmed the extension of the precautionary measure in the “WhatsApp” case until the end of the investigation* The Federal Civil and Commercial Appeals Chamber confirmed the temporary extension of the advance protection measure recommended by the National Commission for (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit overturns a District Court ruling which summarily dismissed a monopolisation claim by importing the incorrect standard from the refusal to deal caselaw in Aspen Skiing (Chase Manufacturing / Johns Manville)
Bona Law (San Diego)
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit overturned a district court decision dismissing a federal monopolization claim brought by Chase Manufacturing d/b/a Thermal Pipe Shields (TPS). In its published opinion, the Tenth Circuit held that the district court erred in granting (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal set to hear the first environmental class action claim brought under the domestic collective action regime against a water company (Severn Trent Water)
Baker McKenzie (London)
A claim against one of the UK’s largest water companies for allegedly misleading regulators about the number of times it discharged sewage into waterways has been brought in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) on behalf of the company’s eight million customers. It is the first time the “opt (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s decision to fine a pharmaceutical company and its former owners for excessive pricing (Advanz Pharma / Hg Capital / Cinven)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 8 August 2023, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) delivered its judgment upholding the decision by the UK Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”) against pharmaceutical company Advanz Pharma and its former owners Hg and Cinven (jointly, “Advanz”) for excessive pricing (see VBB on (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s decision to fine 3 drugmakers for excessive and unfair pricing of a critical medicine (Advanz / Cinven/ HgCapital)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 8 August 2023, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal ( CAT ) unanimously upheld a decision of the UK Competition and Markets Authority ( CMA ) which in July 2021 had imposed fines totalling more than £101 million on Advanz Pharma ( Advanz ) and two previous private equity owners, Cinven and (...)

The Italian Regional Administrative Court of Latium refers to the EU Court of Justice a preliminary question on limitation periods for the imposition of competition fines by the Italian Competition Authority (Caronte & Tourist)
Municipality of Cagliari
Which limitation period applies to regulatory actions taken by the Italian Competition Authority (ICA) against competition law infringements is a controversial question that divides administrative judges. Recently, this question was raised again in an appeal proceedings instituted before the (...)

The US Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit reverses a ruling against energy drink wholesalers based on the allegation that the energy drink manufacturer had violated the Robinson-Patman Act by providing promotional allowances to a mass merchandiser but not to the wholesalers (U.S. Wholesale Outlet & Distribution / Innovation Ventures)
Dechert (San Francisco)
Key Takeaways The Ninth Circuit recently revived a portion of a price discrimination claim brought by wholesalers of the popular 5-Hour Energy drink against its manufacturer, which provided more favorable promotional terms to a mass merchandiser, while at the same time affirming a defense (...)

The Italian Regional Administrative Tribunal of Latium upholds the Competition Authority’s finding that a pharmaceutical company abused its dominant position by charging excessive prices for an orphan drug (Leadiant)
Municipality of Cagliari
An Italian administrative court confirms the condemnation of a pharmaceutical company for charging excessive prices on an orphan drug* Introduction In Leadiant the Italian Competition Authority (ICA) found a pharmaceutical company, Leadiant, guilty of violating Article 102 TFEU for (...)

The Italian Council of State upholds the fine imposed by the Competition Authority on an FMCG company for entering into unlawful exclusivity agreements with retailers (Unilever Italia)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 11 July 2023, the Italian Supreme Administrative Court (“Court”) upheld the fine imposed by the Italian Competition Authority (“ICA”) on Unilever for entering into unlawful exclusivity agreements with retailers, thus confirming the ICA’s highly restrictive view on the relevance and (...)

The Italian Council of State confirms the finding of an abuse of dominance against an FMCG company in the market for the distribution of impulse ice creams (Unilever Italia)
Municipality of Cagliari
Introduction By the judgment recently issued in the Unilever-AGCM case, the Italian Council of State (the Court) has uphold an infringement decision of the Italian Competition Authority (ICA) against Unilever . The ICA had found that Unilever and its distributors violated Article 102 TFEU. (...)

The Luxembourg Competition Authority takes a note of a ruling by the EU Court of Justice which holds that a National Competition Authority may find a violation of the GDPR in the context of the examination of an abuse of a dominant position
Luxembourg Competition Council (Liège)
Judgment of the CJEU: a national competition authority may find a violation of the GDPR in the context of the examination of an abuse of a dominant position* In its judgment of July 4, 2023 in case C-252/21, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that a national competition (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms that National Competition Authorities may consider violations of data protection laws as part of their abuse of dominance assessments (Meta)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 4 July 2023, the Court of Justice (“CJEU”) handed down its highly anticipated judgment in Case C-252/21 Meta v Bundeskartellamt on the interplay between EU competition law and the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (the “GDPR”). The CJEU held that competition authorities can analyse a (...)

The EU Court of Justice issues a landmark decision regarding the compliance of a major social network with the GDPR and competition law in collecting personal data and the related consent for the provision of customised advertising services (Meta)
Portolano Cavallo (Milan)
,
Portolano Cavallo (Rome)
,
Portolano Cavallo (Milan)
On July 4, 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) issued a landmark decision in Case C-252/21 regarding the compliance of a well-known social network with the GDPR (Regulation EU 2016/679) and competition law in collecting personal data and the related consent for the (...)

The EU Court of Justice holds that National Competition Authorities may consider violations of data protection laws during abuse of dominance assessments (Meta)
Hausfeld (Berlin)
,
Hausfeld (Berlin)
In parallel to the rise of the tech giants, the interplay between EU competition and data protection law has attracted increasing attention. This relationship was at the core of the 2019 Meta decision of the German Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt, BKartA), in which the authority held (...)

The EU Court of Justice delivers a preliminary ruling to clarify the status of resale price maintenance under EU Competition Law (Super Bock)
Taylor Wessing (Eindhoven)
Super Bock ruling* Super Bock ruling provides additional clarity on the object test as the appropriate factual assessment and may have potential implications to ACM’s decisions in relation to resale price maintenance. On 29 June 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") (...)

The EU Court of Justice delivers a judgment to clarify the status of resale price maintenance under EU Competition Law (Super Bock)
Hogan Lovells (Paris)
,
Hogan Lovells (Paris)
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 (...)

The EU Court of Justice holds that resale price maintenance is not automatically a restriction of competition by object (Super Bock)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
,
10BE5 (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
Super Bock : RPM Not Automatically a Restriction of Competition By Object* On June 29, 2023, the Court of Justice ruled on questions referred by the Lisbon Court of Appeals relating to alleged resale price maintenance (“RPM”) by Super Bock, a Portuguese beverage manufacturer. The Court of (...)

The Dutch District Court of Amsterdam accepts jurisdiction to adjudicate a damages claim against a Big Tech company fined by the EU Commission for abuse of dominance (Google Shopping)
Stek (Amsterdam)
,
Stek (Amsterdam)
,
Stek (Amsterdam)
Jurisdictional Ruling against Google Confirms Sumal’s Liability Test: Setting a Precedent?* In a recent judgment of 31 May 2023, the Amsterdam District Court (the District Court) accepted jurisdiction to adjudicate a damages case against Google Netherlands B.V. (located in Amsterdam) as well (...)

The Croatian Competition Authority terminates unfair pricing proceedings against the national postal service due to lack of evidence (Hrvatska Pošta)
Croatian Competition Agency (Zagreb)
CCA terminates proceeding against Croatian Post due to lack of evidence of unfair pricing* The aim of the protection of market competition is primarily to create benefits for consumers and equal conditions for all entrepreneurs on the market, who, acting in accordance with the existing rules (...)

The US Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit partially upholds the district court’s judgment regarding a Big Tech company’s prohibition of third-party app stores and in-app-payment systems from operating on its proprietary iOS platform (Epic Games / Apple)
International Center for Law & Economics (Portland)
Untangling the 9th Circuit’s Ruling in Epic Games v Apple* The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled late last month on Epic Games’ appeal of the decision rendered in 2021 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in Epic Games v Apple, affirming in part and (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit affirms that a Big Tech’s anti-steering policies violate California’s Unfair Competition Law (Epic Games / Apple)
Hausfeld (San Francisco)
,
Hausfeld (San Francisco)
One of the most-watched antitrust cases of the past several years has been Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. (Epic v. Apple), a clash between a multi-billion-dollar video game developer (Epic) and the world’s largest technology company by revenue (Apple). After a three-week trial held in the (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms that the Commission can exclude a Member State from the territorial scope of a formal antitrust investigation without violating the principle of protection against parallel antitrust proceedings (Amazon)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 20 April 2023, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) handed down a judgment which confirmed that the European Commission (“Commission”) can carve out the market of a Member State from the scope of an investigation and allow the Member State authority to investigate the same conduct for its (...)

The Belgian Supreme Court departs from its own caselaw and confirms the arbitrability of exclusive distribution agreements in landmark judgments (Thibelo / Stölzle-Oberglas)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 7 April 2023, the Belgian Supreme Court held that the Belgian rules on the unilateral termination of exclusive distribution agreements of indefinite duration, as contained in Articles X.35 through X.40 of the Code of Economic Law (Wetboek van Economisch Recht / Code de droit économique – (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that non-notifiable mergers can be reviewed under abuse of dominance rules (Towercast)
Mayer Brown (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Paris)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
INTRODUCTION On 16 March 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its keenly anticipated judgment in Towercast(Judgment), following a request for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal, Paris (Court of Appeal). The Judgment clarifies that acquisitions by dominant (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that non-notifiable merger deals can be challenged and reviewed under the abuse of dominance rules (Towercast)
Jones Day (Brussels)
,
Jones Day (Paris)
,
Jones Day (Brussels)
In Short The Development: The Court of Justice of the European Union ("ECJ") held that national competition authorities ("NCA") may investigate and block an M&A transaction that violates Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to the extent it is not reportable (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that Article 102 TFEU permits ex post merger control, at the national level, with a non-Community dimension (Towercast)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
The prohibition of abuse of a dominant position laid down by the Treaties permits an ex post control, at national level, of a concentration of undertakings with a non-Community dimension* The temporal effects of a judgment of the Court confirming the applicability of that prohibition should (...)

The Italian Council of State confirms that a legal monopolist breached Article 102 TFEU by reserving an essential input for its own subsidiary (Hera / Herambiente)
Municipality of Cagliari
Introduction The issue of the special responsibility of a dominant undertaking under Article 102 TFEU to not impair competition has been considered by the Italian Council of State (the Court) in AGCM v Hera. In this case the Court determined an appeal lodged against an infringement decision (...)

The French Court of Appeal overturns the Competition Authority’s €444M fine on three laboratories for abuse of collective dominance in the pharma sector through a disparaging campaign against an "off-label" competitor (Novartis / Roche / Genentech)
Clifford Chance (Paris)
The Court of Appeal quashed the French Competition Authority’s decision fining Novartis, Roche and Genentech EUR 444 million for abusing their collective dominant position, providing welcome clarity on the legal test to assess communications by pharmaceutical companies to the public and to (...)

The Spanish High Court of Madrid reinstates injunctive measures against an international football association (ESLC / UEFA / FIFA)
Flint Global (Brussels)
The 28th Section of the High Court of Madrid (Audiencia Provincial de Madrid), the court of appeal specialising in commercial and competition law in the Madrid region, has recently issued a decision reinstating certain interim measures it had earlier adopted in relation to the Super League (...)

The EU Court of Justice finds a major FMCG company liable for abuse of dominance due to exclusivity clauses imposed by its independent distributors on operators of sale outlets (Unilever Italia)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
Abuse of a dominant position: exclusivity clauses in distribution contracts must be capable of having exclusionary effects* The competition authority is obliged to assess that actual capacity to exclude by also taking into account the evidence submitted by the undertaking in a dominant (...)

The EU Court of Justice preliminarily determines that dominant firms can be held to account for abusive conduct even when third parties implement the infringement (Unilever Italia)
Hausfeld (London)
On 19 January 2023, the CJEU delivered its preliminary ruling in the case Unilever Italia Mkt Operations Srl v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, C-680/20 (“AGCM”) (“Unilever”), on two questions posed by the Consiglio di Stato (Italian Council of State). The first related to the (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms that an effects-based approach applies to exclusive dealing and clarifies the narrow circumstances under which the conduct of distributors can engage the liability of a dominant company (Unilever Italia)
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
On 19 January 2023, the EU Court of Justice, answering questions from the Italian Council of State, confirmed that the Intel effects-based approach applies also to exclusive dealing practices and held that competition authorities must duly examine economic evidence produced by dominant (...)

The EU Court of Justice issues a decision on the imputation of liability and treatment of exclusivity under the EU prohibition on abuse of dominance (Unilever Italia)
Clifford Chance (Brussels)
In its January 2023 Unilever Italia judgment, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") ruled on two important practical aspects of the application of the EU prohibition on abuse of dominance under Article 102 TFEU. Background In December 2020, the Italian Consiglio di Stato made a request for (...)

The EU Court of Justice upholds the General Court’s judgment imposing a fine of approximately €20M on the Lithuanian national rail company for abuse of dominance (Lietuvos geležinkeliai)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
Abuse of a dominant position: The Court of Justice upholds the judgment of the General Court imposing a fine of approximately € 20 million on the Lithuanian national rail company * The Commission conducted a comprehensive analysis which makes it possible to establish to the requisite legal (...)

The EU Court of Justice upholds a finding of abuse of dominance by a national railway company in the Lithuanian freight market (Lietuvos geležinkeliai)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 12 January 2023, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) upheld the General Court’s judgment fining the Lithuanian national railway company, Lietuvos geležinkeliai AB (“LG”), € 20 million for abusing its dominant position in the Lithuanian freight market (Case C-42/21 P). (...)

The Chinese Supreme People’s Court issues a ruling on resale price maintenance in the automobile retail sector which is likely to prompt more follow-on antitrust litigation (Miao Chong / SAIC-GM)
Jones Day (Shanghai)
,
Jones Day (Beijing)
,
Jones Day (Beijing)
In Short The Development: China’s Supreme People’s Court recently ruled for the plaintiff in Miao Chong v. SAIC-GM, which marked a rare triumph for a plaintiff in antitrust litigation as a follow-on to an administrative penalty decision. The plaintiff-consumer alleged that a joint venture (...)

The EU Court of Justice AG Rantos argues that a football federation’s exclusion of a rival football competition is not a restriction by object and is necessary to protect the European Sport Model (ESLC / UEFA / FIFA)
Columbia University (New York)
,
The Graduate Institute for International and Development Studies (Geneva)
Abstract The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was requested to consider whether the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), which (according to the Court) has “conferred on itself the exclusive power to organize pan-European competitions” between football clubs, could (...)

The Seoul High Court upholds the South Korean FTC’s decision to sanction “self-preferencing” as an abuse of dominance (NAVER Shopping)
Korea University (Seoul)
It would no longer be surprising to see competition or regulatory authorities blaming digital platforms for favouring their own services on their own platforms. In particular, in Europe, seeing the General Court’s Google decisions (see e.g., Johannes Persch’s blog posts on Shopping and (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal partially overturns the Competition Authority’s decision concerning a Big Tech company’s distribution practices, and reduces the fine imposed by two-thirds (Apple)
Hausfeld (London)
,
Hausfeld (London)
,
Hausfeld (London)
In a ruling dated 6 October 2022, the Paris Court of Appeal partially annulled a 2020 decision by the French competition authority (the Autorité) against Apple and two Apple products wholesalers, Tech Data and Ingram Micro. This ruling struck a blow to the Autorité, as the period for one (...)

The Hamburg Regional Court denies an injunction and rules there is no obligation to supply in a case concerning a major soft drinks manufacturer (EDEKA / Coca-Cola)
Hogan Lovells (Munich)
,
Hogan Lovells (Hamburg)
,
Hogan Lovells (Munich)
Antitrust law may restrict price increases if the preconditions of a pricing abuse are met. However, decision practice on this topic is scarce. Therefore, EDEKA’s petition for a preliminary injuction filed against Coca-Cola claiming a pricing abuse and demanding supply at lower prices has (...)

The EU General Court confirms the Commission’s decision that a Big Tech firm imposed unlawful restrictions on manufacturers of Android mobile devices and mobile network operators in order to consolidate the dominant position of its search engine (Google Android)
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
The General Court largely confirms the Commission’s decision that Google imposed unlawful restrictions on manufacturers of Android mobile devices and mobile network operators in order to consolidate the dominant position of its search engine* In order better to reflect the gravity and (...)

The EU General Court confirms abuse of dominance by a Big Tech company through tying, with the real legacy of the case extending far beyond (Google Android)
Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) (London)
This article has been nominated for the 2023 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. The General Court confirmed on 14 September 2022 the EC finding in 2018 that Google had abused its dominance by tying its Android operating system with its app (...)

The EU General Court partially annuls a Commission decision against a search engine but upholds the key elements (Google Android)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In its judgment of 14 September 2022 (the “Judgment”), the General Court partially upheld Google’s appeal against the Commission’s 2018 Google/Android decision, but upheld the decision’s most important and consequential elements, thus confirming that certain of Google’s practices regarding the (...)

The EU General Court partially annuls the Commission’s decision against a Big Tech company for non-price-based abuses of dominance (Google Android)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
In September 2022, the General Court partially annulled the European Commission’s 2018 Google Android decision, which fined Google €4.3 billion for abuses of dominance relating to apps it offers for its Android mobile operating system (“OS”). The Court also found that the Commission’s (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal issues a decision which sets key considerations for market definition analysis (ComparetheMarket)
Harcus Parker (London)
In a decision by the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) dated 19 November 2020, the CAT fined Comparethemarket (CTM), a price comparison website a fine of £17.9 million for abuse of dominance in the market for price comparison services. CTM abused its position in the market by imposing wide (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal sets aside the decision of the Competition Authority on MFC clauses on the grounds that it had not demonstrated any appreciable adverse effects on competition to the requisite legal standard (ComparetheMarket)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
On 8 August 2022 the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) set aside the CMA’s infringement decision in its Compare The Market investigation relating to the use of wide MFN clauses. The CAT concluded that the CMA’s definition of the relevant market in the decision was materially wrong and that (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal agrees with the appellant that a fine imposed for anticompetitive MFC clauses should be set aside on the basis that such infringements are not by object anticompetitive and the Competition Authority had failed to prove effects (ComparetheMarket)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) on 8 August 2022 set aside a £17.9 million fine against price comparison website Compare The Market, criticising the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) legal and evidential assessment of the case. The CAT found that the CMA’s “anecdotal (...)

The EU General Court annuls the Commission’s decision imposing a near-billion euro fine on a chip manufacturer for exclusivity payments to phone producer (Qualcomm)
Clifford Chance (London)
The judgment is a rare full annulment in an abuse of dominance case, and the first of an Article 102 TFEU decision adopted by Commissioner Margrethe Vestager. Background On 24 January 2018, the European Commission (EC) imposed a fine of EUR 997 million on Qualcomm for breaching Article 102 (...)

The EU General Court annuls in its entirety the Commission’s decision to fine a chipmaker €1B for exclusivity payments to a smartphone manufacturer on the grounds that the economic analysis was unsubstantiated and procedural errors undermined the rights of the defence (Qualcomm)
Toyota (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
University of Michigan Law School (Ann Arbor)
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 (...)

The French Supreme Court rejects an appeal by a pharmaceutical company which alleged that a €21M fine imposed by the Competition Authority was erroneous (Janssen-Cilag)
Dechert (Paris)
,
Dechert (Paris)
On 1 June 2022, the French Supreme Court (the “Supreme Court”) entirely dismissed the appeal of Janssen-Cilag (“Janssen”) and its parent company Johnson & Johnson against a judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal (the “Court of Appeal”) of 11 July 2019 in the Durogesic® case. However, this (...)

The Ankara Regional Administrative Court partially annuls a decision by the Competition Authority which imposed restrictive interim measures on an e-commerce platform for alleged abusive self-preferencing conduct (Trendyol)
ACTECON (Istanbul)
Until recent times, an interim measure decision of the Turkish Competition Authority (“TCA”) was something hard to come by. However, with the growing prominence of digital markets and the equally strong response from the competition authorities, that situation has changed as well. The latest (...)

The New Zealand Competition Authority files an appeal against a record-breaking fine for misleading consumers calling the fine "manifestly inadequate" (Vodafone)
New Zealand Commerce Commission (Wellington)
Commission appeals record $2.25m fine in Vodafone FibreX case* The Commerce Commission has filed an appeal in the High Court against a record $2.25 million fine imposed on Vodafone NZ Limited (Vodafone) for its offending under the Fair Trading Act during its FibreX advertising campaign. (...)

The EU Court of Justice preliminarily determines that discriminatory access to data may constitute an abuse of a dominant position (Enel)
Ashurst (Brussels)
On 12 May 2022, the European Court of Justice ("the Court") delivered a preliminary ruling on abuse of dominance through the exploitation of data. As the historic monopolist, ENEL had access to customer data which it used to strengthen its position. Key takeaways ENEL prevented its (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal rules that a Big Tech firm did not abruptly terminate a contract with an advertising partner because the termination was objectively justified and a legitimate exercise of commercial freedom (Ulysse / Google) Free
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
,
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
,
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
On March 11, 2022, the Paris Court of Appeals overturned in its entirety a May 31, 2019 judgment of the Paris Commercial Court, which had ordered Google to compensate an advertiser, Ulysse Service (’Ulysse’), for the abrupt termination of established commercial relationships. In this case, the (...)

The Croatian High Administrative Court strikes out a claim by a food wholesaler which sought to overturn a fine for the implementation of unfair trade practices (Kaufland Hrvatska)
Croatian Competition Agency (Zagreb)
UTPS: ANOTHER LEGALLY VALID DECISION: HIGH ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DISMISSES APPEAL OF RE-SELLER KAUFLAND* The High Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia dismissed the appeal of the re-seller Kaufland Hrvatska k.d. from Zagreb and upheld the ruling of the Administrative Court in (...)

The Brazilian Competition Authority suspends exclusivity contracts on the wellness platforms market (Gympass / Totalpass)
Vinicius Marques de Carvalho Advogados (VMCA) (Sao Paulo)
,
Universidade de Brasília (Brasília)
The Administrative Council for Economic Defence (CADE) has prohibited corporate wellness platform Gympass from executing exclusivity contracts with its clients. In its decision, the CADE considered such arrangements as potentially exclusionary as they prevent new entrants in the market from (...)

The UK Competition Authority grants a claim for damages against a railway company (Achilles / Network Rail Infrastructure)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has granted a claim for damages by Achilles Information Limited (“Achilles”) against Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (“Network Rail”). The Judgment is the CAT’s first damages award arising from a standalone claim since 2016, and follows the CAT’s (...)

The EU General Court annuls the decision of the Commission rejecting a complaint against a State-owned logistics operator concerning its alleged abuse of dominance on the market for rail freight transport services in Poland (PKP Cargo)
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
The General Court annuls the decision of the Commission rejecting a complaint against PKP Cargo, a company controlled by the Polish State, concerning an alleged abuse of its dominant position on the market for rail freight transport services in Poland* The General Court examines for the (...)

The Larnaca District Court issues an award of €257K to a grain distributor and retailer as compensation for suffering from predatory pricing (AGS Agrotrading / Cyprus Grain Commission)
Harris Kyriakides (Cyprus)
Cyprus Courts issue their first judgment awarding civil law damages for breach of competition laws. In the first decision issued by the Cyprus Courts on damages to a corporation as a result of infringement of competition laws, the Larnaca District Court awarded on 9 February 2022 the total (...)

The EU General Court rejects an appeal to overturn a Commission decision which made the commitments of a gas company binding to address concerns on the wholesale supply of gas in Central and Eastern Europe (Gazprom)
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
The General Court dismisses the action brought against a decision by the Commission to make binding on Gazprom commitments proposed by the latter in order to address competition concerns raised by the former in relation to the national markets for the upstream wholesale supply of gas in the (...)

The EU General Court annuls the Commission’s landmark decision fining a semiconductor company for €1.06B for abuse of dominant position (Intel)
Jones Day (London)
,
Jones Day (Frankfurt)
,
Jones Day (Brussels)
The EU General Court ("GC") annulled the European Commission’s €1.06 billion antitrust fine imposed on Intel in 2009 for allegedly abusing its dominant position in x86 Central Processing Units ("CPUs") by offering loyalty rebates to customers, excluding competitors such as AMD. The GC held (...)

The EU General Court annuls the Commission’s decision finding that rebates granted by a large semiconductor chip manufacturer resulted in an abuse of dominance (Intel)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In a judgment issued today, the General Court of the European Union has annulled the part of the EU Commission’s decision of 13 May 2009 finding that rebates granted to Intel’s major OEM customers infringed Article 102 TFEU. The Court also annulled the fine of € 1.06 billion imposed on Intel. (...)

The EU General Court annuls the Commission’s decision which found that a semiconductor chip manufacturer had abused its dominant position and imposed a fine of €1.06B (Intel)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
On January 26, 2022, the EU General Court (the Court) annulled the European Commission’s (the Commission) decision that Intel had abused its dominant position regarding its x86 central processing unit (CPU) computer chips and the imposition of a €1.06 billion fine. The judgment demonstrates (...)

The EU General Court annuls in part the Commission’s decision imposing a fine of €1.06B on the world’s largest semiconductor chip manufacturer (Intel)
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
The General Court annuls in part the Commission decision imposing a fine of € 1.06 billion on Intel* The Commission’s analysis is incomplete and does not make it possible to establish to the requisite legal standard that the rebates at issue were capable of having, or likely to have, (...)

The EU General Court annuls most of the Commission’s decision to impose a fine of € 1.06 billion on a semiconductor company for abuse of dominance on the global market for x86 processors (Intel)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
General Court overturns Commission’s Intel decision On 26 January 2022, the General Court of the European Union annulled most of the decision of the European Commission (“Commission”), which had imposed a fine of € 1.06 billion on Intel for having abused its dominant position on the worldwide (...)

The EU General Court partially annuls the Commission’s decision to impose a €1.06B fine on a semiconductor chip manufacturer for its abuse of dominance (Intel)
Ashurst (London)
,
Ashurst (London)
On 26 January 2022, the General Court ("GC") partially annulled the European Commission’s decision to impose a EUR 1.06 billion fine on Intel for abusing its dominant position ("Decision"). The fine was annulled in full. Applying the principles outlined in the European Court of Justice’s (...)

The EU General Court overturns the Commission’s decision to fine a semiconductor chip manufacturer for €1.06 billion for abusing its dominant position (Intel)
Shearman & Sterling (Brussels)
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
This article has been nominated for the 2023 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On 26 January 2022 the General Court (GC) issued its latest judgment in the Intel case, faulting fundamental aspects of the Commission’s original decision (...)

The EU General Court confirms the critical role of robust economic analysis in abuse of dominance cases (Intel)
Oxera (London)
After more than two decades, the Intel saga may have finally ended with the General Court’s judgment of 26 January 2022. The judgment—which had at its core the use of the ‘as-efficient competitor’ test in the context of loyalty rebates―confirms the critical role of robust economic analysis in (...)

The EU General Court annuls a €1.06B fine imposed by the Commission on a chip maker based on economic evidence (Intel)
Netherlands Authority for Consumers & Markets- ACM (The Hague)
,
De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek (Amsterdam)
Three’s a charm for Intel: On judicial review of economic evidence to rebut a legal presumption* In 2009, the European Commission imposed what was then a record-breaking fine of EUR 1.06 billion on Intel for abuse of dominance. Intel’s initial action for annulment was dismissed by the (...)

The US State of New York AG leads a multi-State coalition in appealing the District Court’s dismissal of their lawsuit against a social media company for its monopoly (Facebook)
Office of the New York State Attorney General (Albany)
Attorney General James Leads Multistate Coalition in Continuing Fight to End Facebook’s Illegal Monopoly* NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today led a bipartisan coalition of 48 attorneys general from around the nation in continuing to fight to end Facebook’s illegal (...)

The US District Court for the District of Columbia denies a Big Tech firm’s motion to dismiss the FTC lawsuit alleging an unlawful monopoly acquired through killer acquisitions and barring nascent competitors from their platform (Facebook)
Bona Law (San Diego)
Observations on the Court’s Rejection of Facebook’s Motion to Dismiss the FTC’s Amended Antitrust Complaint* The FTC filed an antitrust lawsuit against Facebook (now Meta Platforms Inc.). Judge James E. Boasberg dismissed it. The FTC then filed an amended complaint. And the same judge just (...)

The EU Court of Justice AG Rantos suggests to the Court criteria to qualify abusive exploitation for a dominant position involving exclusionary practices (Servizio Elettrico Nazionale)
ACTECON (Istanbul)
,
ACTECON (Istanbul)
Introduction: In recent weeks, highly praised opinion ("Opinion”) of the Advocate General Rantos, which was originally published in French, is released in English. In this article, we summarized the opinion of the Advocate General in four short sections and, supplemented each section with (...)

The Croatian High Administrative Court upholds the Competition Authority’s decision fining a watermelon re-seller for imposing unfair trading practices (Fragaria)
Croatian Competition Agency (Zagreb)
UTPS: HIGH ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DISMISSES APPEAL OF RE-SELLER FRAGARIA* The High Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia dismissed the appeal of the re-seller FRAGARIA and upheld the ruling of the Administrative Court in Zagreb of 16 December 2020 rejecting the claim for cancellation (...)

The Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice confirms a telecommunications operator abused its dominant position and reduces the fine imposed by the Competition Authority (Vodafone)
Romanian Competition Council (Bucharest)
The High Court of Cassation and Justice confirmed the abuse of dominant position of Vodafone* The High Court of Cassation and Justice irrevocably confirmed the violation of the Competition Law by Vodafone which abused of its dominant position in relation with SC Netmaster Communications SRL. (...)

The EU General Court largely dismisses a Big Tech company’s appeal against the Commission’s decision finding it had abused its dominant position by favoring its own comparison shopping service (Google Shopping)
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
The General Court largely dismisses Google’s action against the decision of the Commission finding that Google abused its dominant position by favouring its own comparison shopping service over competing comparison shopping services* The General Court upholds the fine of €2.42 billion (...)

The EU General Court confirms the Commission’s decision finding a Big Tech company guilty of abuse of dominance by favouring its own comparison shopping service on its general results pages (Google Shopping)
Hausfeld (Berlin)
With its judgment of 10th November 2021, Europe’s General Court did not just dismiss Google’s appeal against the European Commission’s Google Search (Shopping) decision, uphold the fine, tell gatekeepers “don’t be evil,” and remind everyone that Europe ensures equal opportunities. The Court (...)

The EU General Court upholds a €2.42B fine imposed on a Big Tech company and dismisses an appeal against the Competition Authority’s decision (Google Shopping)
Hausfeld (Berlin)
,
Ashurst (London)
,
Hausfeld (London)
The General Court has today dismissed Google’s appeal of the European Commission’s Google Shopping Decision from June 2017 and has upheld the EUR 2.42 billion fine imposed on Google – a record fine at the time. The General Court agreed with the European Commission’s finding (in its vast (...)

The EU General Court confirms the EU Commission’s decision to fine a Big Tech company for abusing its dominant position in online search by discriminating against comparison shopping services to favour its own offering (Google Shopping)
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
,
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
Google’s flagship product is the Google search engine, which provides search results to consumers, who pay for the service with their data. Almost 90% of Google’s revenues stem from adverts, such as those it shows consumers in response to a search query. In 2004, Google entered the separate (...)

The EU General Court confirms that “self-preferencing” by a Big Tech company can cause abuse of dominance violation (Google Shopping)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Toyota (Brussels)
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”) (...)

The Cypriot Administrative Court upholds the Competition Authority’s decision to impose a fine of €2 million for anticompetitive practices in the supply of raw cow milk (Pancyprian Organization of Cattle Farmers)
Commission for the Protection of Competition of the Republic of Cyprus (Nicosia)
The Administrative Court has upheld the decision of the Commission for the Protection of Competition and the fine of €2.100.000 imposed on the Pancyprian Organization of Cattle Farmers (POCF) Public Ltd for infringements of the Protection of Competition Law of 2008.* The Administrative Court (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismisses the class action brought on behalf of indirect purchasers alleging that a chip manufacturer abused its dominant position by refusing to sell chips to manufacturers that did not pay above-market royalty rates to license its patents (Qualcomm / Stromberg)
Rock Creek Energy Group, LLP
,
Hausfeld (San Francisco)
On September 29, 2021, the Ninth Circuit vacated the class certification order in Stromberg et al. v. Qualcomm, an antitrust class action brought on behalf of indirect purchasers alleging that Qualcomm monopolized the market for modem chips by refusing to sell chips to manufacturers that did (...)

The UK Competition Authority along with EU Member States cracks down on excessive pricing in the pharmaceutical sector (Pfizer / Flynn / Actavis)
McDermott Will & Emery (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (London)
Competition authorities have been traditionally reluctant to pursue excessive pricing cases since many of them had failed on the facts. However, in recent years, there has been a resurgence of the topic in pharma-related cases. In particular, the national competition authorities have led the (...)

The EU General Court dismisses the action brought against the Commission’s decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure against two shoe retail companies for transfer pricing (Nike / Converse)
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
Tax rulings issued to Nike and Converse by the Netherlands tax administration: the General Court dismisses the action brought against the Commission’s decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure* The Commission complied with the procedural rules, and neither failed to fulfil its (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice rules that a car manufacturer’s selective distribution system limiting the supply of new vehicles and spare parts to tuning services providers is a by-object restriction (Porsche Tuning II)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 6 July 2021, the German Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”) upheld an injunction against Porsche and its German distributor (“Porsche” or the ”Defendants”) in favor of an industry association whose members manufacture and distribute customized parts for tuning purposes (the “Association”). The (...)

The German Supreme Court rules that car manufacturers cannot restrict the sales of their cars and spare parts in the tuning industry (Porsche-Tuning II)
Ashurst (Frankfurt)
,
Ashurst (Munich)
In a decision of 6 July 2021, published in September 2021, the German Federal Court of Justice ("FCJ") ruled that restrictive clauses in retail and service agreements between Porsche and its authorised distributors were in breach of competition law. Porsche could not prohibit its authorised (...)

The US District Court for the District of Colombia dismisses a case filed by the FTC against a Big Tech company due to the lack of plausible evidence that the company has monopoly power in the personal social networking services market (Facebook)
Bona Law (Detroit)
,
Bona Law (San Diego)
Facebook Wins First Antitrust Battle: The FTC and State Enforcers Fail to Establish (For Now) Facebook’s Monopoly on Social Media Networks (with update)* In late 2020, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the attorneys-general (AGs) from 48 states filed nearly identical antitrust lawsuits (...)

The US District Court for the District of Columbia grants motions to dismiss two parallel antitrust complaints filed by the FTC and a group of State AGs against a social media company for monopolization, with the FTC being allowed to file an amended complaint in 30 days (Facebook)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (New York)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (New York)
On June 28, 2021, Judge James E. Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted Facebook’s motions to dismiss two parallel antitrust complaints filed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and a group of state enforcers. The complaints accused Facebook of illegally (...)

The Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal upholds the annulment of the nearly €41M abuse of dominance fine imposed by the Competition Authority against a railway company (Nederlandse Spoorwegen)
KPN (Amsterdam)
,
Bird & Bird (The Hague)
On 1 June 2021 the Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal (“CBb”), which is the highest administrative court in the Netherlands, upheld the annulment of the nearly € 41 million abuse of dominance fine imposed by the Authority for Consumers and Markets (“ACM”, the Dutch competition (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal confirms infringement in paroxetine pay-for-delay case but slashes fines (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)
Ashurst (London)
,
Ashurst (London)
The judgment was handed down by the Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") in the paroxetine pay-for-delay case in 2018. However, the CAT decided to wait for a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") on certain questions before determining the remaining grounds of appeal. (...)

The Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s decision stating that a print circulars distributor abused its dominant position (FK Distribution)
Danish Competition and Consumer Authority (Copenhagen)
Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal: FK Distribution has abused its dominant position* The Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal has upheld a June 2020 decision by the Danish Competition Council stating that FK Distribution abused its dominant position on the market for distribution of (...)

The Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal upholds a decision by the Competition Authority against the biggest distributor of unaddressed mail for abuse of dominant position by tying its sale of print circulars with its sale of viewing of circulars on several of its digital platforms (FK Distribution)
Bird & Bird (Copenhagen)
,
Bird & Bird (Copenhagen)
On the 27th April 2021, the Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal (“DCAT”) upheld a June 2020 decision by the Danish Competition Council (“DCC”). The DCC concluded that FK Distribution (FK), as the biggest distributor of unaddressed mail (print circulars) in Denmark, had abused its dominant (...)

The Delhi High Court reviews the Competition Authority’s inquiry into a Big Tech company’s data privacy policy (WhatsApp)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
Delhi High Court Judgement on CCI Inquiry into WhatsApp’s new data privacy policy in India* While reporting on the initial media news in my earlier blog on the same topic published on 23 April 21 , I had promised to come back with a detailed reporting on the above judgment which was then (...)

The Delhi High Court upholds the Competition Authority’s order directing an investigation into the privacy policy rolled out by a Big Tech company (WhatsApp)
Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan (New Delhi)
,
Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan (New Delhi)
,
Vahura (New Delhi)
KEY POINTS Mere pendency of some issues before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”), or any of the High Courts does not necessarily bar CCI from exercising jurisdiction otherwise vested with it under the Act. BRIEF FACTS Whatsapp LLC (“WhatsApp”) is the proprietor of the (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal confirms the Competition Authority’s settlement policy following the appeal of a musical instrument company (Roland)
Ashurst (London)
,
Ashurst (London)
,
Ashurst (London)
Roland UK ("Roland") appealed the level of the penalty imposed by the Competition and Markets Authority ("CMA") for engaging in resale price maintenance ("RPM") in relation to the supply of electronic drums. Roland argued that the Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") should reduce the penalty (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal provides guidance for post-Brexit permission to serve out of the jurisdiction applications and confirms that damages occasioned by anti-competitive conduct will not be narrowly construed (Epic Games / Apple / Google)
Hausfeld (London)
The Tribunal issued its combined permission to serve out of the jurisdiction judgment in Epic Games v Apple (the Apple Claim) and Epic Games v Google (the Google Claim) on 22 February 2021, declining permission for service on Apple Inc. and granting permission for service for a subset of (...)

The Paris Commercial Court rules that a Big Tech company should pay €1.27M in antitrust damages for abuse of its dominant position in the online search advertising market (Oxone Technologies / Google)
Hausfeld (London)
Following a stand-alone claim filed by a directory enquiry services provider, the Paris Commercial Court ruled, on 10 February 2021, that Google holds a dominant position in the online search advertising market through Google Ads and abuses that position by setting up rules which are “neither (...)

The Paris Commercial Court imposes a €1.2M fine on a Big Tech company for abuse of a dominant position against a telephone directory services company (Oxone Technologies / Google)
Addleshaw Goddard (Paris)
In the context of a stand-alone action – which falls under the new provisions resulting from the transposition of the Damages Directive – the Paris Commercial Court ruling at first instance orders Google to pay EUR 1,2 million in damages to Oxone, a telephone directory services company. Oxone (...)

The EU Court of Justice upholds the General Court’s ruling finding that an information request issued by the Commission as part of its investigation into a Big Tech company’s predatory pricing practices is valid (Qualcomm)
Ashurst (Brussels)
,
Ashurst (London)
On 28 January 2021, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") upheld a ruling of the General Court finding that an information request issued by the EU Commission, as part of its investigation into Qualcomm’s predatory pricing practices, did not breach the principles of necessity and (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms the Commission’s power to issue a request for additional information after a statement of objections (Qualcomm)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 28 January 2021, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) handed down a judgment in Case C-466/19 P (Qualcomm Inc. and Qualcomm Europe v. European Commission). Following a complaint submitted in 2010 by Icera Inc., a producer and distributor of soft chipsets which deliver high-performance (...)

The Luxembourg Administrative Tribunal rules for the first time on the Competition Authority’s competence in matters of ex post control of concentrations in the energy sector (Fédération des Artisans / Encevo / Enovos Luxembourg / Paul Wagner / Fils)
Bonn & Schmitt (Luxembourg)
,
I. Introduction On January 25, 2021 the Administrative Tribunal of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (hereinafter the “Administrative Tribunal”) rendered a judgment ruling for the first time on the competence of the Competition Council of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (hereinafter the (...)

The German Parliament passes the 10th amendment to the Restraints of Competition Act which provides modifications and changes regarding abuse control
Hogan Lovells (Düsseldorf)
,
Hogan Lovells (Düsseldorf)
,
Hogan Lovells (Düsseldorf)
On 14 January 2021, the German parliament passed the long-awaited 10th amendment to the Act against Restraints of Competition (ARC). This came after the governing parties, CDU/CSU and SPD, had submitted a final amendment "at the eleventh hour" which provided for some additional modifications (...)

The Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court upholds the Competition Authority’s decision finding an abuse of dominance and an anti-competitive agreement between a German internal combustion engine manufacturer and its national distributor in the railway sector (Deutz / Diesel Motor Nordic)
Bird & Bird (Copenhagen)
,
Bird & Bird (Copenhagen)
The case centred around a consortium that was handling the renovation of the engines of the IC3 trains of the Danish State Railways. A member of the consortium, Fleco ApS (Fleco), was in several ways restricted from buying spare parts to be used in the renovation of the train engines. The (...)

The Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court confirms the Competition Authority’s decision stating that a German engine manufacturer abused its dominant position (Deutz / Diesel Motor Nordic)
Danish Competition and Consumer Authority (Copenhagen)
Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court: Deutz and Diesel Motor Nordic infringed competition legislation by preventing the supply of spare parts for the IC3-trains* On 11 January 2021, the Maritime and Commercial High Court has confirmed that Deutz abused its dominant position by refusing (...)

The Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court confirms a decision of the Competition Authority finding that a German internal combustion engine manufacturer had both abused its dominant position and entered into an anti-competitive agreement with its Danish dealer (Deutz / Diesel Motor Nordic)
Aquis Exchange
On 11 January 2021, the Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court (“MCC”) confirmed a decision of the Danish Competition Council (“DCC”) finding that the German internal combustion engine manufacturer Deutz had both abused its dominant position and entered into an anti-competitive agreement (...)

The Croatian Administrative Court upholds the Competition Authority’s decision that fined a fruits and vegetable company for the imposition of unfair trading practices (NTL)
Croatian Competition Agency (Zagreb)
UTPS: Administrative Court upholds CCA decision sanctioning NTL 450,000 kuna for imposition of unfair trading practices* The Administrative Court in Zagreb completely rejected the statement of claim of Narodni trgovački lanac d.o.o. (NTL) in the administrative dispute against the decision (...)

The Croatian Administrative Court upholds the Competition Authority’s decision fining watermelon re-seller for imposition of unfair trading practices (Fragaria)
Croatian Competition Agency (Zagreb)
UTPS: Administrative court upholds CCA decision sanctioning Fragaria 350,000 kuna for imposition of unfair trading practices* On 16 December 2020 the Administrative Court in Zagreb completely rejected the statement of claim of the re-seller Fragaria d.o.o. in the administrative dispute (...)

The Turkish Administrative Court issues noteworthy judgements setting the standard of proof for abuse of dominance (Sahibinden.com) (Enerjisa)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
,
,
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
In 2019 and 2020, Turkish administrative courts handed down noteworthy judgments concerning two particular decisions of the Turkish Competition Board (“Board”). In both of these cases, namely the (i) Sahibinden Bilgi Teknolojileri Pazarlama ve Tic. A.Ş. (“Sahibinden”) judgment rendered by the (...)

The Indian Supreme Court upholds the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal’s decision declaring no hub-and-spoke cartel involving two ride-hailing platforms in the automobile services market for fixing cab fares through their apps (Uber / Ola)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
Uber and Ola finally win antitrust case in India -Supreme Court upholds NCLAT decision -No Hub and Spoke cartel – (but importantly rejects NCLAT decision on lack of locus standi)* The Supreme Court of India vide its judgment dated 15.12. 2020 has upheld the concurrent findings on merits of (...)

The EU Court of Justice publishes its judgment stating that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by the Belgian collecting society is not necessarily abusive (SABAM)
Portolano Cavallo (Milan)
,
Portolano Cavallo (Milan)
On November 25, 2020, the Court of Justice (“ECJ”) rendered its judgment in Case C-327/19, stating that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by the Belgian collecting society SABAM is not necessarily abusive under Article 102 TFEU. The case originated with a request for a (...)

The EU Court of Justice rejects allegations of an abuse of dominance through unfair pricing by the Belgian collective management organization for copyright (SABAM)
University of Liège
,
University of Liège
On 25 November 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’ or ‘Court’) rendered its judgment on the alleged abuse of dominance by the only Belgian collective management organisation for copyright in musical works (the SABAM). In this decision, the Court confirms that calculation (...)

The EU Court of Justice states that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by a collecting society is not necessarily abusive (SABAM)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 25 November 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) delivered a judgment in case C-372/19 holding that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by collecting societies such as SABAM is not necessarily abusive under Article 102 TFEU. The case had come (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by a Belgian collecting society is not abusive (SABAM)
Aquis Exchange
On 25 November 2020, the Court of Justice ((“ECJ”) delivered a judgment in Case C-327/19, ruling that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by the Belgian collecting society SABAM is not necessarily abusive under Article 102 TFEU. The case came before the ECJ by way of a (...)

The Brussels Court of Appeal annuls the Competition Authority’s decision rejecting a football club’s request for interim measures (Virton / RBFA)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In a judgment delivered on 19 November 2020, the Markets Court of the Brussels Court of Appeal (Marktenhof / Cour des marchés) (the Markets Court) annulled the decision adopted on 29 June 2020 by the Competition College (Mededingingscollege / Collège de la concurrence) of the Belgian (...)

The EU General Court maintains the Commission’s decision finding that a Lithuanian railway company abused its dominant position in the national rail freight sector (Lietuvos geležinkelai)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 18 November 2020, the General Court (“GC”) issued its judgment confirming the European Commission’s (“Commission”) decision to fine Lithuanian Railways for the abuse of its dominant position on the Lithuanian rail freight market. The GC rejected all of the appellant’s complaints, but (...)

The EU General Court confirms the Commission’s decision finding that the Lithuanian railway incumbent abused its dominant position by dismantling a rail track (Lietuvos geležinkelai)
Belgian Competition Authority (Brussels)
,
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University Information
Comment On 18 November 2020, the General Court of the European Union (‘GC’) delivered its ruling in the Lietuvos geležinkeliai [Lithuanian Railways] case and upheld the European Commission’s decision in which the national railway company of Lithuania was found to have abused its dominant (...)

The EU General Court confirms the Commission’s decision finding that a national rail company abused its dominant position on the market (Lietuvos geležinkelai)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
,
Balcıoğlu Selçuk Akman Keki (BASEAK) (Istanbul)
,
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
The Factors Affecting the Use of Essential Facilities Doctrine in Light of the Lithuanian Railway v Commission Decision: A Comparison with the Turkish Practice and Potential Implications 1) Introduction On November 18, 2020, the General Court of the European Union (“General Court”) upheld (...)

The EU General Court upholds the Commission’s decision finding that the national railway company of Lithuania abused its dominant position in the national rail freight market (Lietuvos geležinkelai)
General Court of the European Union (Luxembourg)
The General Court upholds the Commission’s decision finding that the national railway company of Lithuania abused its dominant position on the Lithuanian rail freight market* Lietuvos geležinkeliai AB (‘LG’), the national railway company of Lithuania, both manages railway infrastructure and (...)

The Hungarian Supreme Court upholds Competition Authority’s finding that a food retail company has abused its dominance (Auchan)
Hungarian Competition Authority (Budapest)
The GVH won the case against Auchan at the Curia of Hungary* Budapest, 13 November 2020 - The Curia of Hungary upheld in its entirety the GVH’s decision to impose a record fine of more than one billion forints. Thus, it has now become final that Auchan has abused its significant market (...)

The US DOJ files an antitrust complaint against a search engine for abuse of dominance (Google)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (Washington)
,
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (Washington)
On October 20, the U.S. Department of Justice filed its long-awaited antitrust complaint against Google, joined by 11 state Attorneys General (Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, and Texas). The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice rules on the burden of proof for showing exhaustion of trademark right (Amazon / Coty)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 15 October 2020, the German Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”) issued a judgment on the burden of proof for showing the exhaustion of trademark rights in a case pitting Coty against Amazon. After having made a test purchase from Amazon of two bottles of a perfume bearing the “JOOP!” (...)

The French Supreme Court confirms that the incumbent horse race betting operator abused its dominant position (PMU)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Hogan Lovells (Brussels)
On 14 October 2020, the French Supreme Court (“Cour de Cassation”) confirmed the Court of Appeals’ finding that horserace-betting company Pari Mutuel Urbaine (“PMU”) abused its dominant position in the market for physical horserace betting by pooling bets with those in the online market. (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal confirms the Competition Authority’s decision ordering a search engine to negotiate with news agencies and press publishers (Google)
Addleshaw Goddard (Paris)
On 8 October 2020, the Paris Court of Appeal rejected Google’s challenge to the French Competition Authority’s ("FCA") decision compelling Google to negotiate "neighbouring rights" with news agencies and press publishers. "Neighbouring rights" include the right to receive payment when a (...)

The Brussels Court of Appeal partially annuls a decision imposing a record fine on a telecommunications company for a margin squeeze abuse of dominance (Proximus)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
,
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 7 October 2020, the Markets Court of the Brussels Court of Appeal (Marktenhof / Cour des marchés) (the Markets Court) partially annulled the decision of 26 May 2009 (the 2009 Decision), for lack of admissible evidence, by which the Belgian Competition Authority (Belgische (...)

The Turkish Administrative Court upholds the fines imposed by the Competition Authority on two electricity sales companies for abuse of dominance (Rescs / Ayedas)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
,
Balcıoğlu Selçuk Akman Keki (BASEAK) (Istanbul)
,
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
(1) Introduction In 2018, in its Enerjisa decision, the Turkish Competition Board (“ Board ”) had imposed administrative fines amounting to a total of TRY 143 million on three retail electricity sales companies (namely AYESAŞ, BAŞKENT and TOROSLAR) (together, the “ RESCs ”) and one (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reverses a judgment that upheld “skinny labels” and allowed a generic medicine to launch on uses not covered by a patent (GlaxoSmithKline / Teva)
Rutgers University (New Brunswick)
On October 2, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s judgment in favor of defendant Teva in a case involving “skinny labels.” GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., 976 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2020). When a drug can be used to treat multiple (...)

The Albanian Administrative Court of First Instance in Tirana ascertains the abuse of the dominant position by the national football federation (Albanian Football Federation)
Albanian Competition Authority (Tirana)
Republic of Albania Competition Authority* The Competition Authority informs that: Today on 21.09.2020, the Administrative Court of First Instance in Tirana decided: To uphold the Competition’s Commission Decision no. 693, dated 14.05.2020 "To ascertain the abuse of the dominant position (...)

The EU Court of Justice AG Saugmandsgaard Øe advises dismissing the parties’ challenges to the Commission’s finding of abuse of dominance on the Slovak broadband services market (Slovak Telekom) (Deutsche Telekom)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 9 September 2020, Advocate General (“AG”) Saugmandsgaard Øe issued his opinion in Deutsche Telekom v. European Commission (Case C-152/19) and Slovak Telekom v. European Commission (Case C-165/19) advising the Court of Justice (“ECJ”) to dismiss the parties’ challenges to the Commission’s (...)

The EU Court of Justice AG Saugmandsgaard Øe recommends the Bronner legal test to be limited to ’refusals to make available’ (Slovak Telekom) (Deutsche Telekom)
Latham & Watkins (Brussels)
,
University of Liège
Advocate General (‘AG’) Saugmandsgaard Øe recommends the European Court of Justice (‘ECJ’) to (i) rule that the test included in the Bronner Judgment – including the indispensability requirement – should only be applied in specific circumstances (i.e., in case of ‘refusals to make available’), (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules on a license dispute between a software and a telecommunications company and clarifies the English Courts’ approach to FRAND royalty cases (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 26 August 2020, the UK Supreme Court issued a judgment in a licence dispute involving Standard Essential Patents (“SEPs”) pitting Unwired Planet, a US based patent assertion entity, against Huawei, a Chinese telecommunications company that produces smartphones. Unwired Planet brought an (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rules that there is no antitrust violation in a multinational semiconductor company’s licensing of its standard-essential patents (Qualcomm)
Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC (Boston)
,
Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC (Washington)
,
Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC (New York)
Ninth Circuit Reverses FTC Win in FTC v. Qualcomm, Finding No Antitrust Violations from Qualcomm’s Licensing of its Standard-Essential Patents* In a reversal that came as no surprise to many observers, on Tuesday, August 11, 2020, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reverses a ruling finding that a semiconductor company abused its dominant position regarding its standard-essential patents (Qualcomm)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Washington)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (New York)
On August 11, 2020, a Ninth Circuit panel reversed the District Court for the Northern District of California’s judgment in FTC v. Qualcomm, Inc. The panel held that Qualcomm’s conduct—(a) refusing to license its standards essential patents (SEPs) to rival chipset manufacturers; (b) refusing (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturns a ruling finding that a semiconductor company’s licensing practice abused its dominant position (Qualcomm)
Hogan Lovells (Washington)
,
Hogan Lovells (Washington)
,
The Legal Aid Society of Cleveland (Cleveland)
On 11 August 2020, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (“Ninth Circuit”), in a unanimous opinion by Judge Callahan, reversed the U.S. Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC’s”) win in the district court against Qualcomm Inc. (“Qualcomm”) and upheld Qualcomm’s licensing (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit strikes down a sweeping injunction against a semiconductor company and reins in an expansive interpretation of the Sherman Act (Qualcomm)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (New York)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington)
On August 11, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decisively reversed the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC or Commission) controversial district court win challenging Qualcomm’s licensing practices. In rejecting every aspect of the lower court’s decision, the Ninth Circuit (...)

The Italian Council of State refers to the EU Court of Justice questions concerning the interpretation and application of Art. 102 TFEU following an abuse of dominance in the electricity market (Enel)
Luiss Guido Carli University (Rome)
,
Bird & Bird (Rome)
On 20 July, the Italian Supreme Administrative Court (Consiglio di Stato, CDS) referred to the Court of Justice (CJ) several questions concerning the interpretation and application of Article 102 TFEU. In the context of the dispute following the Italian Competition Authority’s decision to (...)

The EU Court of Justice AG Pitruzzella offers guidance on the method for calculating royalties that may lead to a finding of abuse of a dominant position (SABAM)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 16 July 2020, Advocate General (“AG”) Pitruzzella issued an opinion in Case C-327/19, advising the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) on whether the method for calculating royalties used by SABAM, the Belgian collecting society, amounts to an abuse of a dominant position under (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice overturns the Dusseldorf Court of Appeals’ interim decision and finds an online social media platform to have abused its power in collecting data from different sources (Facebook)
German Engineering Federation (VDMA)(Frankfurt)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Cologne)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Cologne)
On June 23, 2020, the Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”) overturned the Düsseldorf Court of Appeals’ (“DCA”) interim decision and rejected Facebook Inc.’s (“Facebook”) request to suspend the enforceability of the Federal Cartel Office’s (“FCO”) prohibition decision. The FCJ disagreed with the (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice provisionally confirms an allegation against a social media company for abusing its dominant position (Facebook)
German Competition Authority (Bonn)
Federal Court of Justice provisionally confirms allegation of Facebook abusing dominant position* Facebook uses terms of service that also allow for the processing and use of user data that are collected online outside the Facebook platform. The Bundeskartellamt prohibited Facebook from (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice preliminarily confirms that an online platform abused its dominant position on the national market of social networks (Facebook)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 23 June 2020, the German Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”), in summary proceedings, preliminarily confirmed the finding of the Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) that Facebook had abused its dominant position. It overturned the decision of the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf that had (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice confirms abuse of dominance over data collection by an online platform without the user’s explicit consent (Facebook)
Bird & Bird (Dusseldorf)
,
Bird & Bird (Dusseldorf)
The Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) rejected Facebook’s application for suspensive effect in connection to its appeal to the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf against the decision of the Federal Cartel Office (FCO) prohibiting Facebook from collecting and processing Facebook users’ data (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice rejects an appeal against the prohibition of exclusivity clauses in online sales of event tickets (CTS Eventim)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In December 2017, the German Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) prohibited ticketing services provider CTS Eventim from using exclusivity agreements with event organisers and ticket offices. CTS Eventim had to amend its contractual clauses and allow trading partners to sell at least 20% of their (...)

The Beijing Intellectual Property Court rules that a national audio-video copyright association did not abuse its dominant position (KTV / CAVCA)
King & Wood Mallesons (Beijing)
Antitrust litigations concerning intellectual property rights increased in 2020. Among notable cases, the case of eight KTV v. China Audio Video Copyright Association (“CAVCA”) for its abuse of dominance attracted particular attention. Background In this case, the plaintiffs of eight KTV (...)

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal finds no abuse of dominance by one of the largest national real estate agencies in its ranking of online advertisements (VBO / NVM / Funda)
Bird & Bird (The Hague)
,
KPN (Amsterdam)
,
Bird & Bird (The Hague)
On 26 May 2020, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal (“Court”) delivered its judgment in a dispute between the real estate association VBO Makelaars (“VBO”) versus the Dutch Association of Real Estate Agents (“NVM”) over the online real estate platform of Funda Real Estate (“Funda”). The Court (...)

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal rules that there is no abuse of dominance by one of the largest national real estate agencies in the online housing market (VBO / NVM / Funda)
University of Leiden - Europa Institute (Leiden)
In its judgment, on the 26th May 2020, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal (‘the Court’) ruled that there is no abuse of Funda’s dominant position. The Court hereby dismissed the claim which had been filed by VBO Estate Agents in The Netherlands against Funda. This judgment ended a six-year-old (...)

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal dismisses a claim that a real estate agency’s self-preferencing strategy is abusive because the competitive position remained unaffected (VBO / NVM / Funda)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
On 26 May 2020, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal (the “Court”) handed down its judgment in the dispute between the real estate agent association VBO (“VBO”) and Funda Real Estate (“Funda”) and the Dutch Association of Real Estate Agents (“NVM”). The Court upheld the judgment of the District Court (...)

The Turkish Regional Administrative Court annuls the Competition Authority’s decision that concluded a violation but no fine because the same action and subject had already previously been fined (Mey İçki)
ACTECON (Istanbul)
,
ACTECON (Istanbul)
,
ACTECON (Istanbul)
The Regional Administrative Court Found the Turkish Competition Authority’s Decision concerning Mey İçki Unlawful: Abuse of the Dominance Should Be Evaluated Separately in terms of Each Product Market!* Introduction The Ankara Regional Administrative Court’s 8th Administrative Chamber (...)

The German Federal Court of Justice clarifies obligations of parties in SEP licensing negotiations on FRAND terms (Sisvel / Haier)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In its judgment of 5 May 2020, the Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”) overturned the appeal ruling of the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf (the “Düsseldorf Court”) and found that Haier’s mobile telephones and tablets infringed Sisvel’s standard-essential patent (“SEP”) and that Sisvel had not (...)

The Italian Court of Cassation rules on the limitation period of antitrust damages claims in two judgments in the telecommunications sector (Uno Communications / Telecom Italia) (Uno Communications / Vodafone Italia)
Autorité de la concurrence (Paris)
1.- Introduction By judgements issued on the 27th of February, 2020, No. 5381, and on the 3rd of April 2020, No. 7677, the Italian Court of Cassation (Corte di Cassazione) ruled that the antitrust damages claims brought by Uno Communications S.p.A. against Vodafone Italia S.p.A. and Telecom (...)

The Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal reverses a decision of the Competition Authority requiring telecom providers to open up their fixed networks in the Netherlands to other providers (KPN / VodafoneZiggo / T-Mobile / Tele2)
KPN (Amsterdam)
,
Bird & Bird (The Hague)
On 17 March 2020, the Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal (“CBb”) reversed the 2018 decision of the Authority for Consumers and Markets (“ACM”) requiring telecom providers KPN and VodafoneZiggo to open up their fixed networks in the Netherlands to other providers. In September 2018, (...)

The Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal quashes the Competition Authority’s finding of a joint dominance in the retail broadband market (KPN / VodafoneZiggo / T-Mobile / Tele2)
Oxera (London)
,
Oxera (London)
,
Oxera (Amsterdam)
On 17 March 2020, the Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal (CBb) published its long-awaited verdict on the appeal against the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) 2018 finding of joint dominance in the Dutch retail broadband market. Why did the CBb rule in favour of the (...)

The Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal annuls the Competition Authority decision requiring telecommunications providers to open networks (KPN / VodafoneZiggo / T-Mobile / Tele2)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 17 March 2020, the Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal (“Appeals Tribunal”) reversed a decision of the Authority for Consumers & Markets (“ACM”) which required telecommunications provider KPN and cable provider VodafoneZiggo to open their fixed networks to other providers. On 27 (...)

The Italian Supreme Administrative Court rejects an appeal lodged by a multinational drug company against a previous decision asserting it as having abused its dominant position by imposing unfair prices for drugs (Aspen)
Luiss Guido Carli University (Rome)
,
Bird & Bird (Rome)
On 13 March, the Italian Supreme Administrative Court ("Consiglio di Stato") rejected the appeal lodged by the multinational Aspen Group against the decision of the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio (“TAR”), which fully upheld the decision adopted by the Italian Competition Authority (...)

The Indian Appellate Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s decision that a company mandating a party to sign an agreement containing unfair and restrictive clauses is tantamount to abuse of its dominance (Verifone)
Supreme Court of India (New Delhi)
,
Supreme Court of India (New Delhi)
Introduction The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) by way of its common order dated 13 March 2020 dismissed two appeals preferred by M/s Verifone India Sales Pvt Ltd. (Appellant/ OP 1/ Verifone) against two separate orders passed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI). (...)

The Austrian Supreme Court confirms the lower court’s decision finding that the national public broadcasting company did not abuse its dominant position by increasing its fee for decryption service (ORF)
Reidlinger Schatzmann Rechtsanwälte (Vienna)
1. Introduction On 12 March 2020 the Austrian Supreme Court in competition matters (Oberster Gerichtshof als Kartellobergericht; hereinafter: “Supreme Court”) confirmed a decision by the Higher Regional Court of Vienna in competition matters (Oberlandesgericht Wien als Kartellgericht; (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal seeks to reinstate record fines imposed on pharmaceutical companies for abuse of dominant position through excessive and unfair pricing of an anti-epilepsy drug (Pfizer / Flynn)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
On 10 March 2020 the UK Court of Appeal handed down its hotly anticipated judgment in Flynn Pharma Limited & Anr vs Competition and Markets Authority. The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) was seeking to reinstate record fines totalling £89.4m imposed on pharmaceutical companies (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal upholds the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s quashing of the Competition Authority’s decision against pharmaceutical undertakings who had allegedly abused their dominant position by pricing their epilepsy drug unfairly (Pfizer / Flynn)
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
,
Hausfeld (London)
On 10 March 2020 the Court of Appeal upheld the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s (CAT) quashing of the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) decision that Pfizer and Flynn Pharma (Flynn) had abused their dominant positions in the market by pricing their epilepsy drug unfairly. Among other (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal considers the test for excessive pricing after an undertaking had charged unfairly high prices for phenytoin sodium capsules (Pfizer / Flynn)
Bristows (London)
,
Bristows (London)
Introduction In December 2016, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found that Pfizer and Flynn had charged unfairly high prices for phenytoin sodium capsules, an important anti-epilepsy drug, in breach of competition law. The CMA imposed fines totalling £90 million. Pfizer and (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal provides guidance regarding the legal test to determine whether pricing is excessive and unfair in the pharmaceutical market (Pfizer / Flynn)
Norton Rose Fulbright (Brussels)
,
Latham & Watkins (Brussels)
The UK Court of Appeal Clarifies the Legal Test for Excessive Pricing* Under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”), an undertaking may abuse its dominant position by “directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices”. The UK Court of (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal imposes agency discretion in the methodology to establish the unfairness of prices, thereby increasing the burden of proof on companies to avoid a finding of excessive pricing (Pfizer / Flynn)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
The UK Court of Appeal Overturns the CAT & Imposes Agency Discretion on Excessive Price Benchmark* On March 10, 2020, the England and Wales Court of Appeal (CoA) handed down a significant ruling that reintroduces agency discretion in the methodology used to establish the unfairness of (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal dismisses the Competition Authority’s appeal against a ruling quashing the fines imposed on two pharmaceutical companies for charging excessive and unfair prices for an anti-epilepsy drug (Pfizer / Flynn)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 10 March 2020, the UK’s Court of Appeal dismissed the Competition and Market Authority’s (“CMA”) appeal against a 2018 ruling by the Competition Appeals Tribunal (“CAT”) that quashed the CMA’s 2016 fine imposed on Pfizer and Flynn for charging excessive and unfair prices for phenytoin (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal provides guidance on the legal test for excessive and unfair pricing after finding that an undertaking is charged unfairly high prices for phenytoin sodium capsules (Pfizer / Flynn)
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
,
Latham & Watkins (Brussels)
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (Brussels)
Under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (“TFEU”), an undertaking may abuse its dominant position by “directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices”. The UK Court of Appeal recently provided guidance regarding the legal test to determine (...)

The Indian Appellate Tribunal overrules the Competition Authority’s order in an abuse of dominance case in the e-commerce sector (All India Online Vendors Association / Flipkart India)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
NCLAT directs investigation into alleged abuse of dominant position by Flipkart -Quashes earlier CCI order closing the case* By a recent judgment dated 04.03.2020, the Hon’ble National Company Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”) has set aside the order dated 06.11.2018 passed by the Competition (...)

The Danish Maritime and Commercial Court finds a medicine distributor guilty of abusing its dominant position (CD Pharma)
Bird & Bird (The Hague)
,
Bird & Bird (Copenhagen)
On 3 March 2020, the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court found a medicine distributor, CD Pharma AB, guilty of having abused its dominant position back in 2014. Due to its dominant position, the undertaking in question had a special responsibility not to harm competition – a responsibility (...)

The Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal overturns Competition Authority’s decision and finds that the termination of a contract with a competitor does not constitute an abuse of a dominant position (Svenska Förpacknings och Tidningsinsamlingen)
Swedish Competition Authority (Stockholm)
The termination of a contract with a competitor did not constitute an abuse of a dominant position* Svenska Förpacknings- och Tidningsinsamlingen, FTI, does not have to provide its competitor TMResponsibility, TMR, access to recycling stations. The decision of the Patent and Market Court of (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit finds that the District Court should not have dismissed a monopolization and tying arrangement suit in the telecoms sector (Comcast / Viamedia)
Hausfeld (New York)
On February 24th, a Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled unanimously that a District Court should not have dismissed a monopolization and tying arrangement suit brought against Comcast by Viamedia, a supplier of advertising services to cable companies and other television content (...)

The EU General Court hears an appeal following an abuse of dominance decision involving online comparison shopping services (Google Shopping)
Hausfeld (London)
,
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (London)
Introduction From 12-14 February 2020, the European Union’s General Court (the “General Court”) heard Google’s appeal of the European Commission’s 27 June 2017 abuse of dominance decision pursuant to Article 102 TFEU (the “Decision”) involving on-line comparison shopping services (“CSSs”). A (...)

The EU General Court hears an appeal against an abuse of dominance decision in online comparison shopping services (Google Shopping)
Catholic University of Louvain (UCLouvain)
Background On 27 June 2017, the European Commission imposed a record fine of 2.42 billion euros to Google for abuse of dominant position under Article 102 TFEU consisting in self-favouring its own Comparison Shopping Service (“CSS”) by displaying it more prominently and under enriched (...)

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the Commission’s investigative powers regarding dawn raids (České dráhy)
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
,
Linklaters (London)
Recent judgements by Court of Justice of the EU provide important clarifications regarding the European Commission’s powers and obligations when conducting dawn raids. On 30 January 2020, the Court of Justice handed down a judgment dismissing two appeals by České dráhy, a.s. against General (...)

The EU Court of Justice dismisses the appeals against the Commission’s decisions in the case of alleged predatory practices by the Czech railway incumbent (České dráhy)
Ashurst (Brussels)
On 30 January 2020, the European Court of Justice dismissed the appeals in joined cases C-538/18 P and C-539/18 P brought by Czech national rail carrier České dráhy, which sought to set aside the judgments of the General Court in cases T‑325/16 and T‑621/16 upholding the European Commission’s (...)

The Turkish Administrative Court annuls the fines imposed by the Competition Authority due to failure to establish the required standards for competition law infringement in excessive pricing cases (Sahibinden.com)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
This case note analyses Ankara 6th Administrative Court’s (the “Administrative Court”) annulment judgment (18.12.2019; 2019/946 E., 2019/2625 K.) through which the Administrative Court reviewed the Turkish Competition Board’s (the “Board”) decision dated 01.10.2018 and numbered 18-36/584-285, (...)

The Turkish Administrative Court annuls a Competition Authority’s decision assessing excessive pricing in the online market and provides guidance on the standard of proof to be followed by the Authority (Sahibinden.com)
Guernsey Competition Authority (St. Peter Port)
,
ACTECON (Istanbul)
The standard of proof plays a significant role during the process of the investigations performed within the framework of the competition law. However, no explicit provision regarding the standard of proof which shall be taken as basis in the preliminary and full-fledged investigations carried (...)

The German Federal Court provides further guidance on abusive ad blocking and holds that it may constitute abuse of dominance (Ad Blocker IIIa)
Blomstein (Berlin)
In its judgement of 10 December 2019, the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) found that ad blocking can constitute an abuse of a dominant position by the ad blocker provider. The decision marks another milestone in the ad blocker saga. Following a series of lower court judgments and a BGH (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal clarifies the relevant test for characterizing an excessive price in the market of waste disposal for hospitals and clinics in Corsica (Sanicorse)
Dechert (Paris)
,
Dechert (Paris)
On 14 November 2019, the Paris Court of Appeal (the “Court”) quashed a decision of the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) of 20 September 2018 in which the latter had imposed € 199 000 fine on Sanicorse for having abused its dominant position on the market for infectious clinical waste (...)

The Italian Supreme Court rules on the abuse of a dominant market position of a company in the aviation sector and reinstates the criteria needed to determine the relevant market (Ryanair)
Accademia del Lusso (Milan)
The facts of this case date back to 2007, when Ryanair decided to exclude all intermediaries from relations with its customers and directed all consumer internet traffic to its website, where other services were also offered by operators and commercial partners of the company, which therefore (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds the Ofcom decision on abuse of dominance and discriminatory pricing strategy in the mail delivery service market (Royal Mail / Whistl)
Bird & Bird (London)
,
Bird & Bird (London)
On 12 November 2019, the Competition Appeal Tribunal ("Tribunal") upheld Ofcom’s decision against Royal Mail Plc (Royal Mail), finding Royal Mail’s pricing strategy in relation to bulk mail delivery services to be discriminatory and an abuse of dominance. Royal Mail first announced the (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal considers what constitutes abusive conduct and the use of expert economic advice and clarifies what the "as-efficient competitor test" entails (Royal Mail / Whistl)
Latham & Watkins (London)
,
Latham & Watkins (London)
,
Latham & Watkins (London)
UK COMPETITION APPEAL TRIBUNAL JUDGMENT: PUSHING THE ENVELOPE ON ABUSE OF DOMINANCE* The CAT’s Royal Mail v Ofcom judgment considers what constitutes abusive conduct, the “as-efficient competitor” test, and the use of expert economic advice. On 12 November 2019, the UK Competition Appeal (...)

The Italian Supreme Court rules that an airline company abused its dominant position by refusing to grant online travel agencies the right to intermediate its tickets by accessing its databases and procedures for flight reservations (Ryanair)
Bird & Bird (Rome)
,
Luiss Guido Carli University (Rome)
On 12 November, the Italian Supreme Court brought to an end a multi-jurisdictional dispute which began in 2008, related to the Ryanair’s refusal to grant online travel agencies ("OTAs") the right to intermediate its tickets by accessing its databases and procedures for flight reservations. (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds a fine totalling £50M against the national postal service for abusing its dominant position by announcing price changes (Royal Mail / Whistl)
Ashurst (London)
,
Ashurst (London)
On 12 November 2019, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") upheld Ofcom’s decision to fine Royal Mail £50 million for abusing a dominant position by announcing price changes. Royal Mail has announced that it is seeking permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW - (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds Ofcom’s fine against the national postal service for price discrimination (Royal Mail / Whistl)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
The UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds the Ofcom’s record £50 million fine against Royal Mail for price discrimination against Whistl, a competitor in the market for the processing of bulk mail.On 12 November 2019, the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) upheld the UK communication (...)

The Italian Regional Administrative Court of Lazio upholds the Competition Authority’s decision which fined a company for abusing its dominant position in the electricity market (Enel)
Bird & Bird (Rome)
,
Luiss Guido Carli University (Rome)
On 17 October 2019, the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio (“TAR”) issued its judgment on the appeal lodged by Enel Group against the decision of the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) issued on 20 December 2018. The ICA had fined the company over EUR 93 million for abusing its (...)

The EU Commission imposes interim measures on a chipmaking company suspected of having put in place contractual restrictions to exclude its competitors from the market (Broadcom)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (Paris)
,
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (Paris)
On June 26, 2019, the EU Commission opened a formal investigation into U.S. chipmaker Broadcom’s alleged abuse of dominance. In a rather unexpected move, the EU Commission informed the company, on the same day, of its intention to impose interim measures, a long-forgotten tool. Broadcom, (...)

The Italian Regional Administrative Court of Lazio rejects the appeal against abuse of dominance decision in the markets for the management of copyrights (SIAE)
Bird & Bird (Rome)
,
Luiss Guido Carli University (Rome)
On 26 September 2019, the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio (“TAR”) rejected the appeal lodged by the Italian Authors’ and Publishers’ Association (the “SIAE”) against the decision of the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) taken on 25 September 2018. In this decision, the Authority (...)

The Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal confirms that a company abuses its dominance by using conditional rebates and exclusivity provisions in the payment card sector (Teller)
Danish Competition and Consumer Authority (Copenhagen)
The Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal confirms that Teller (now Nets) abused its dominant position by using rebates conditional on exclusivity and exclusivity provisions* The Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal (DCAT) confirmed the 18th of September 2019 the ruling by the Danish (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturns a $15M antitrust jury verdict in favor of an airline company against a travel-planning giant (US Airways / Sabre)
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (New York)
In the first two-sided market case to be decided by a court of appeals since the Supreme Court issued its American Express ruling (“Amex”) in June 2018, a Second Circuit Panel in September nixed a $15 million antitrust jury verdict in favor of US Airways against travel-planning giant Sabre (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal upholds the decision of the Competition Authority to fine a pharma company for abuse of dominance (Jansson-Cilag / Johnson & Johnson)
Dechert (Paris)
,
Dechert (Paris)
,
Willkie Farr & Gallagher (Paris)
More particularly, the Court affirmed the FCA’s conclusion that Janssen infringed competition law by, on the one hand, disparaging competing fentanyl specialties towards health professionals, emphasizing the risks associated with a switch from Durogesic© to a generic version and, on the other (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirms a bench trial’s decision in a rare price discrimination suit (Spartan Concrete Products / Argos USVI)
Hausfeld (New York)
Robinson-Patman Act decisions are rare. This often is because legitimate complaints against a supplier providing favorable pricing to a complaining customer’s competitors either are settled out of court or prior to a decision on the merits. So it is of interest when a price discrimination suit (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirms a directed verdict following a rare price discrimination trial (Spartan Concrete Products / Argos USVI)
Jones Day (Washington)
,
Jones Day (Cleveland)
,
Failure to show antitrust injury proved fatal to price discrimination claims as the Third Circuit affirmed a directed verdict in favor of cement company, Argos USVI, in a case brought by its customer, ready-mix concrete company Spartan Concrete Products ("Spartan"). This decision highlights (...)

The Swedish Court of Appeal confirms the dismissal of the Competition Authority’s action against a stock exchange company for alleged abuse of dominance (Nasdaq)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 28 June 2019, the Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal (the “Appeal Court”) upheld a ruling of the Swedish Patent and Market Court that rejected an action brought by the Swedish Competition Authority (Konkurrensverket or “KKV”) against Nasdaq Stockholm Aktiebolag and several affiliated (...)

The Rotterdam District Court annuls a €41M fine imposed by the Dutch Competition Authority on a railway operator for allegedly abusing its dominant position (Nederlandse Spoorwegen)
Netherlands Authority for Consumers & Markets- ACM (The Hague)
,
Bird & Bird (The Hague)
ABUSE OF DOMINANCE FINE OF € 41 MILLION FOR DUTCH RAILWAY OPERATOR ANNULED* Introduction The Authority for Consumers and Markets (“ACM“, the Dutch competition authority) was in 2017 – after years of silence – finally able to fine an undertaking for abuse of dominance. A heavy fine of (...)

The Rotterdam District Court annuls a €41M fine imposed on a rail transport incumbent for allegedly abusing its dominant position (Nederlandse Spoorwegen)
Bird & Bird (The Hague)
,
KPN (Amsterdam)
On 27 June 2019 the District Court of Rotterdam annulled the decision of the Authority for Consumers and Markets ("ACM", the Dutch competition authority) to impose a fine of € 41 million on Dutch rail transport incumbent N.V. Nederlandse Spoorwegen ("NS") for abusing its dominant position (...)

The Czech Supreme Court confirms that invoking trademark rights to prevent parallel imports can amount to an abuse of dominance (Fiskars / Mountfield)
Skils (Prague)
On 29 May 2019, the Supreme Court (SC) partially granted an extraordinary appealed lodged by Mountfield against the previous judgment of the High Court in Prague of 23 May 2017 (Ref.No. 3 Cmo 132/2016) in a dispute with Fiskars concerning an alleged violation of Firskars’ rights to trademarks (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California finds that a semiconductor company’s "no license, no chips" program violates antitrust laws (Qualcomm)
Ropes & Gray (New York)
,
Ropes & Gray (New York)
,
US Attorney’s Office – District of Massachusetts (Boston)
This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On May 21, 2019, following a full trial on the merits, Judge Koh of the Northern District of California issued a 233-page opinion in a closely watched case (...)

The Brussels Court of Appeal asks the EU Commission to provide advice and information regarding the tariffs for concerts and music festivals of a copyright collecting society (SABAM)
Simmons & Simmons (Brussels)
,
Simmons & Simmons (Brussels)
On 10 May 2019, by interim judgment, the Brussels Court of Appeal asked the European Commission to provide advice and information regarding the tariffs for concerts and music festivals of SABAM – the Belgian copyright collecting society – in light of the prohibition to abuse a dominant (...)

The Belgian Markets Court rejects an appeal lodged by an undertaking against the decision to reject its request for interim measures and explains limits of its jurisdiction (The Great Circle)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 8 May 2019, the Markets Court of the Brussels Court of Appeal rejected as inadmissible the appeal lodged by The Great Circle against the decision of the Belgian Competition Authority (“BCA”) to reject its request for interim measures against the Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium (...)

The Hungarian Supreme Court annuls the Competition Authority’s decision which fined a company for having applied a discount scheme leading to dual pricing on the contact lenses market (Alcon)
Bird & Bird (Budapest)
,
Bird & Bird (Budapest)
The Hungarian Supreme Court ("Kúria") annulled on 10 April 2019 a decision of the Hungarian Competition Authority ("GVH") which had imposed a € 321,000 fine on Alcon Hungária Kft. and Alcon Services AG Hungarian branch (jointly, the "Alcon Companies") for having applied a discount scheme (...)

The Turkish Competition Authority fines a company for resale price maintenance after the Council of State annulled its first decision finding no infringement regarding prepaid card prices (Turkcell II)
ELIG Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law (Istanbul)
,
Kia (Frankfurt)
The Turkish Competition Board published its reasoned decision on an additional investigation on whether Turkcell İletişim Hizmetleri A.Ş. has violated the Law No. 4054 on the Protection of Competition through resale price maintenance and exclusivity practices (19-03/23-10; 10.01.2019). The (...)

The Spanish Supreme Court confirms the annulment of a €120M fine imposed by the Competition Authority against three mobile operators for abuse of dominance in wholesale markets for termination of SMS and MMS (Telefónica / Vodafone / Orange)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
,
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
In three judgments delivered in December 2018 and January 2019, the Spanish Supreme Court confirmed the annulment of fines amounting to a total of €120 million imposed on the three main telecoms operators in Spain (i.e., Telefónica, Vodafone and Orange) for abuse of dominance in the wholesale (...)

The Russian Presidium of the Supreme Court considers a competition case for the first time, granting the appeal of Europe’s largest port operator concerning sanctions for abuse of dominance (Novorossiysk Commercial Sea Port)
ALRUD (Moscow)
,
ALRUD (Moscow)
THE FIRST COMPETITION CASE IN THE PRESIDIUM OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION – RESOLUTION OF THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE FAS AND THE LARGEST STEVEDORE* Background and main problems Novorossiysk Commercial Sea Port PJSC (“NCSP”) is one of the Europe’s largest port operator in (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California denies a motion for a summary judgment that a company’s standard essential patent licensing practices breached its FRAND obligations (ASUS / InterDigital)
Hogan Lovells (Washington)
,
Hogan Lovells (Washington)
,
Baker McKenzie (Washington)
This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. In a decision published in redacted form, Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the Northern District of California denied ASUSTek Computer Inc.’s and ASUS Computer (...)

The EU General Court slightly reduces the fine in a case of abuse of dominance in the telecom sector to account for the Commission’s failure to establish exclusionary effects over a limited period (Slovak Telekom)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 13 December 2018, the General Court (the “GC”) issued a judgment upholding in large part an October 2014 decision of the European Commission (the “Commission”) against Slovak Telekom, in which it found that Slovak Telekom had abused its dominant position by engaging in a constructive (...)

The Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal upholds the decision fining a pharmaceutical distributor for excessive pricing (CD Pharma)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 29 November 2018, the Danish Competition Appeals Tribunal upheld a 31 January 2018 decision of the Danish Competition Authority (“DCA”) finding that CD Pharma abused its dominant position on the Danish market by charging excessive prices for the sale of oxytocin, a hormone that acts as a (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal upholds a decision qualifying an essential patent offer to be FRAND (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Jindal Global University (Sonipat)
UK COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS FRAND INJUNCTION* Last week, the UK Court of Appeal upheld the findings of the High Court in an important case regarding standard essential patents (SEPs). Of particular significance, the Court of Appeal upheld the finding that the defendant, an implementer of (...)

The Turkish Court of Ankara annuls a decision of the Competition Authority which contains controversial issues such as market power provided by digital platforms and excessive pricing (Sahibinden.com)
Erdem & Erdem (Istanbul)
Introduction Decision numbered 2019/946 E., 2019/2625 K. of the 6 th Administrative Court of Ankara (“Annulment Decision”) is critical since it has annulled the Competition Authority's (“Authority”) Sahibinden.com Decision numbered 18-36/584-285 and dated 01.10.2018 (“Sahibinden (...)

The Indian National Company Law Appellate Tribunal reverses the Competition Authority’s decision which penalized a company for imposing anti-competitive vertical restraints in the manufacturing vehicle sector (Hyundai)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
NCLAT quashes CCI order punishing Hyundai for Resale Price Maintenance and Tying-in* The National Company Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT/ Tribunal ”) by way of an order dated August 19, 2018 , has set aside the CCI Order dated June 14, 2017 against Hyundai Motors India Ltd. (“Hyundai”) which (...)

The Slovenian Administrative Court confirms a substantial part of a decision in a case related to abuse of dominance (Telekom Slovenije)
Fatur Menard (Ljubljana)
INTRODUCTION On 9 January 2018, the Administrative Court of the Republic of Slovenia (hereinafter referred to as the Court) ruled in case I U 423/2015-48, brought by Telekom Slovenije against the Slovenian Competition Protection Agency’s (hereinafter referred to as SCPA) decision no. (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit finds that a medical device company conspired to deny insurance coverage for telemetry monitors (LifeWatch Services / Highmark)
Hausfeld (Washington)
In LifeWatch Services Inc. v. Highmark Inc., the Third Circuit determined that a medical device company had plausibly alleged a conspiracy among Blue Cross Blue Shield health insurance companies to deny their insured coverage for telemetry monitors. The decision reversed a district court (...)

The Canadian Supreme Court dismisses an appeal and upholds the Court of Appeal’s order requiring a professional association to stop restricting its members’ use of real estate data (Toronto Real Estate Board)
Canadian Competition Bureau (Gatineau)
Court order upheld requiring TREB to stop restricting its members’ use of real estate data* The Competition Bureau today welcomes the Supreme Court of Canada’s (SCC) dismissal of the Toronto Real Estate Board’s (TREB) application seeking leave to appeal a December 2017 decision from the (...)

The Austrian Supreme Court confirms that charging different prices for tickets booked via a global distribution system depending on the location of the customer/travel is abusive (Lufthansa)
Reidlinger Schatzmann Rechtsanwälte (Vienna)
Introduction On 17 July 2018 the Austrian Supreme Court in competition matters (Oberster Gerichtshof als Kartellobergericht; hereinafter: “Supreme Court”) confirmed a cease and desist order prohibiting Lufthansa from abusing its dominant position by charging different ticket prices based on (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal announces its provisional judgment in an appeal against the Competition Authority’s infringement decision in an excessive price case (Pfizer / Flynn)
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
I. Introduction In the last couple of years, there has been a trend for antitrust watchdogs around the world to investigate excessive pricing, especially in the pharmaceutical sector. Last year, the European Commission opened its first investigation into excessive pricing in the (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal partly annuls the Competition Authority’s decision that pharmaceutical companies abused their dominant position by setting excessive and unfair prices for an epilepsy drug (Pfizer / Flynn)
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
This article has been nominated for the 2019 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On 7 June 2018, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) set aside in part the 2016 decision of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) that Pfizer and Flynn (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal finds an incorrect application of the legal test for dominance and quashes the Competition Authority’s record fines imposed on two pharmaceutical companies for charging excessive prices for an anti-epilepsy drug (Pfizer / Flynn)
MemeryCrystal (London)
EXCESSIVE PRICE? COMPARED TO WHAT?* On 7 June 2017, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) set aside parts of the Competition & Market Authority’s (“CMA”) decision in relation to the CMA’s finding that Pfizer and Flynn charged excessive and unfair prices for phenytoin sodium capsules (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal partially sets aside the Competition Authority’s decision that fined two undertakings nearly £90 million for charging unfairly high and excessive prices for anti-epilepsy drugs (Pfizer / Flynn)
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
On 7 June 2018, the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) partially set aside the Competition and Market Authority’s (CMA’s) decision fining Pfizer and Flynn nearly £90 million for charging unfairly high, or excessive, prices for phenytoin sodium capsules (an anti-epilepsy drug) in breach of (...)

The Higher Commercial Court of Ukraine confirms a fine on a company for exploitative practices in certain national airports (Lukoil)
Asters (Kiev)
Headnote: In December 2014, Ukraine International Airlines PJSC (UIA) submitted a complaint against Lukoil Aviation Ukraine LLC (Lukoil) to the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (AMC). Having reviewed the complaint and conducted relevant investigation, the AMC imposed fine on Lukoil in the (...)

The Australian Federal Court dismisses an appeal by the Competition Authority against a judgment establishing market power in the pharmaceutical sector (Pfizer)
Herbert Smith Freehills (Melbourne)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Melbourne)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Sydney)
The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia has dismissed an appeal by the ACCC against an earlier judgment in relation to pharmaceutical company Pfizer. While the Full Court upheld the single judge decision that Pfizer had not misused its market power or engaged in prohibited (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms that price discrimination is not itself an abuse of dominance in breach of competition law unless the discriminatory conduct is capable of producing a distortion of competition for the trading party (MEO / Serviços de Comunicações e Multimédia)
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
On 19 April 2018, the EU’s Court of Justice delivered its judgment in the MEO case, the latest in a recent line of rulings endorsing an effects-based analysis for abuse of dominance cases. EU competition law requires dominant companies not to discriminate between different customers or (...)

The Spanish Supreme Court orders restarting the investigation of a complaint about abuse of dominant position (Oracle)
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
On 26 February 2013, Hewlett Packard and Hewlett Packard Española, S.L. (jointly, HP) filed a complaint against Oracle Corporation and Oracle Ibérica, S.R.L. (jointly, Oracle) before the NMCC denouncing restrictive practices of competition in the field of relational database management (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit finds that the entry of ride-sharing firms into the local taxi market increased rather than decreased competition (Philadelphia Taxi Association / Uber)
Edgeworth Economics (Washington)
Third Circuit Rules in Uber’s Favor over Philadelphia Taxi Association* In a recent decision, the Third Circuit upheld a November 2016 district court decision to dismiss a complaint by the Philadelphia Taxi Association and 80 taxi companies, finding that there was no violation of antitrust (...)

The Amsterdam District Court issues a verdict in a long-running abuse of dominance case involving the largest national property website (Funda)
Oxera (Oxford)
In March 2018 the Court of Amsterdam issued a verdict in a long-running abuse of dominance case involving funda, the largest property website in the Netherlands. The Court found funda to be dominant, but did not consider the company’s discriminatory listing of rival estate agents to be (...)

The Polish Supreme Court examines a case of non-compliance with a decision of the Competition Authority finding an abuse of dominant position (PKP Cargo)
Utrecht University
,
Affre i Wspólnicy (Warsaw)
In the judgement of 7 March 2018 (III SK 6/17), the Polish Supreme Court (“SC”) examined the case of non-compliance with the decision of the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (“NCA”) on the abuse of a dominant position by PKP Cargo, Poland’s largest railway freight (...)

The Moldovan Supreme Court of Justice quashes the infringement decision of the Competition Authority concerning refusal to deal in the airport services market (Avia Invest)
University of Macau - Faculty of Law
On 21 February 2018, the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) of the Republic of Moldova has quashed the decision issued by the Competition Council (CC) in a case concerning the alleged refusal to deal on the market for lease of commercial premises at the Chisinau International Airport (KIV). SRL (...)

The Latvian Supreme Court overturns a decision annulling the Competition Authority’s decision to fine an author associate in a royalty payment case (AKKA / LAA)
Latvian Supreme Court (Riga)
Dispute between AKKA/LAA and the Competition Council on the penalties imposed on the association is referred for re-examination* On 6 February, the Department of Administrative Cases of the Supreme Court annulled the judgment of the Administrative Regional Court in the case of dispute (...)

The Spanish Supreme Court rejects the allegations of abuse of dominance by a postal incumbent for lack of evidence (Correos)
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
,
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
,
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
In 2014, UNIPOST, S.A. (Unipost) filed a complaint before the NMCC against Sociedad Estatal de Correos y Telegrafos, S.A., (Correos) denouncing that Correos was able to offer discounts to large customers, well above the discounts offered by Unipost and other competitors for similar services, (...)

The Cairo Economic Court upholds the recommendation of the Egyptian Competition Authority and fines a TV broadcasting company for abusive bundling of international football events (Nasser Al-Khulaifi / beIN Media)
Fingleton (London)
The Cairo Economic Court upholds the recommendation of the Egyptian Competition Agency and fines a TV broadcasting company for abusive bundling of international football events (Nasser Al-Khulaifi / beIN Media) On 29th January 2018 the Cairo Economic Court found that beIN had abused its (...)

The Malaysian Competition Appeal Tribunal upholds a Competition Authority’s decision in a case of abuse of dominance in the provision and management of online foreign workers permit renewals (My E.G)
Wong Partners (Kuala Lumpur)
On 28 December 2017, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) upheld the Malaysian Competition Commission’s (MyCC) decision on 24 June 2016 that My E.G. Services Berhad (MyEG) and its wholly-owned subsidiary, My E.G Commerce Sdn. Bhd. (MyEG Commerce) have abused their dominant position in the (...)

The EU Court of Justice prohibits selective distributors from selling luxury products on third-party online platforms (Coty Germany / Parfümerie Akzente)
Kyriakides Georgopoulos (Athens)
,
Zepos & Yannopoulos (Athens)
On 6 December 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union handed down its Judgment on the awaited Coty Germany v Akzente case. The case concerned whether a supplier of luxury cosmetics, operating a selective distribution system for its products, may validly prohibit its authorized (...)

The Moldovan Supreme Court of Justice quashes a Competition Authority’s decision regarding refusal to supply in the context of public procurement of pharmaceutical products (Esculap-Farm)
University of Macau - Faculty of Law
On 25 October 2017 the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) of the Republic of Moldova has quashed the decision issued by the Competition Council (CC) in a case concerning the refusal to supply pharmaceutical products purchased in the context of public procurement by public hospitals and other (...)

The Moldovan Supreme Court of Justice upholds the NCA decision concerning refusal to supply in the context of public procurement of pharmaceutical products (Medeferent)
University of Macau - Faculty of Law
On 4 October 2017 the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) of the Republic of Moldova has upheld the decision issued by the Competition Council (CC) in a case concerning the refusal to supply pharmaceutical products purchased in the context of public procurement by public hospitals and other public (...)

The EU Commission fines the incumbent Lithuanian railway company €28 million for abuse of dominance (Baltic Rail)
European Commission - DG COMP (Brussels)
On 2 October 2017 the European Commission adopted its decision in the Baltic Rail case finding that the Lithuanian railways company, Lietuvos geležinkeliai (’LG’) abused its dominant position. The extraordinary circumstances of the case prompted one commentator to wonder whether this is ’the (...)

The EU Court of Justice accepts an alternative to the United Brands test to establish excessive pricing (AKKA / LAA)
Municipality of Cagliari
On replying to the preliminary questions referred by the Supreme Court of Latvia (SCL), in AKKA v LAA the CJEU has accepted a methodology other than the two-limb United Brands test to establish an excessive pricing practice. The CJEU also clarifies the criteria to set the amount of the fine (...)

The EU Court of Justice refers a case back to the General Court for re-examination (Intel)
Norton Rose Fulbright (Brussels)
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
Major victory for Intel as CJEU sends case back to General Court for re-examination* On 6 September, the EU’s highest court, the Court of Justice (CJEU), released its long-awaited decision in the Intel case, in which the Commission imposed a fine of €1.06 billion – at the time, the largest (...)

The EU Court of Justice reverses the General Court’s decision in an abuse of dominance case against a Big Tech company in the market for processors and rules that rebates should be judged under the rule of reason (Intel)
Compass Lexecon (Washington)
,
The Graduate Institute for International and Development Studies (Geneva)
Roundtable Discussion on the ECJ ruling in Intel* On 6 September 2017, the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) issued a landmark judgment where it set aside the judgment of the General Court (“GC”) in the highly debated Intel matter. This judgment is of particular significance because it (...)

The EU Court of Justice endorses an effects-based assessment of rebates (Intel)
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
,
White & Case (Brussels)
This article has been nominated for the 2018 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On 6 September 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU" or "Court") essentially held in Intel that the European Commission ("Commission") (...)

The EU Court of Justice issues a landmark judgment on the legal treatment of fidelity rebates granted by dominant companies (Intel)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 6 September 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) issued its long-awaited judgment in the Intel case (Case C-413/14 P), setting aside the General Court’s (“GC”) judgment. The GC must now re-assess the legality of the Commission’s decision in light of the ECJ’s ruling. (...)

The EU Court of Justice annuls the General Court’s ruling that upheld the fine imposed by the Commission for an abuse of dominance (Intel)
Jones Day (Brussels)
,
Jones Day (London)
,
Jones Day (Frankfurt)
What happened? The European Court of Justice ("ECJ") set aside a General Court ruling that had upheld a €1.06 billion fine imposed by the European Commission on Intel for abusing its dominant position in the market for x86 central processing units ("CPUs"). Background In its 2009 (...)

The EU Court of Justice refers back to the General Court a case for it to examine the factual and economic evidence and to establish whether the rebates at issue are capable of restricting competition (Intel)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
In its long awaited judgment on Intel’s appeal against the General Court’s ruling that its rebate scheme was inherently anticompetitive and that there was no need to consider the circumstances of the case, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has today referred the case back to (...)

The EU Court of Justice revisits forty years of case law on when a dominant company’s rebate scheme may be abusive (Intel)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
,
Baker McKenzie (London)
In its ruling on the European Commission’s 500 page Intel decision, in a crisp 150 paragraphs, the EU Court of Justice (the Court) revisited forty years of jurisprudence on when a dominant company’s rebate scheme may be abusive. Though no final decision for Intel, the case marks a potentially (...)

The EU Court of Justice defines the conditions for the legality of discounts made by dominant companies (Intel)
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) published its judgement in a highly expected case, largely due to the huge administrative fine of € 1,060 million set by the EC in 2009, but mostly because of its relevance in a very important area of commerce: the legal treatment of discounts by dominant (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules that exclusivity rebates cannot be presumed to be an abuse of dominance (Intel)
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
,
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
,
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (Berlin)
Exclusivity rebates are used in markets ranging from postal deliveries through ice cream to computer processors and are normally regarded as beneficial to consumers. However, when applied by dominant companies such rebates could potentially entrench an existing market position and have been (...)

The EU Court of Justice renders its judgment in a case regarding loyalty rebates granted by dominant companies (Intel)
Baker Botts (Brussels)
An alternative view on accuracy and administrability Introduction In its judgment in Intel of 6 September 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) rejected the notion that particular loyalty rebates granted by a dominant company are subject to a per se illegality standard (...)

The EU Court of Justice quashes a judgment of the General Court that upheld a fine of €1.06 billion for an abuse of dominance due to implementing loyalty rebates based on exclusivity agreements (Intel)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
On September 6, 2017 ,the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) quashed the 2014 judgment of the General Court (GC) that upheld a fine of €1.06 billion ($1.5 billion) on Intel Corporation Inc. (Intel) for abusing a dominant market position by implementing loyalty rebates based on (...)

The EU Court of Justice modernizes abuse of dominance notion (Intel)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
(“CJEU”) set aside General Court’s 2014 Intel judgment, upholding a European Commission (the “Commission”) decision fining Intel €1.06 billion for abuse of dominance through exclusivity rebates . The CJEU held that the General Court had erred in failing to examine all of Intel’s arguments (...)

The Italian Regional Administrative Court for Latium upholds the infringement decision made by the Competition Authority against a pharmaceutical laboratory for excessive pricing (Aspen)
Municipality of Cagliari
By the judgement handed down in Aspen v AGCM , the Regional Administrative Court of Latium (the Court) has recently determined the appeal lodged by a South African manufacturer of generic drugs, Aspen, against the 2016 decision made by Italian Competition Authority (ICA), rejected all the (...)

The Beijing Intellectual Property Court finds an ad-block app breaching unfair competition provisions (Feihu / Sohu / Xiaoyi)
University of Melbourne
,
Hogan Lovells (Beijing)
,
China Competition Bulletin (Beijing)
On 2 April 2017, the Beijing Intellectual Property Court upheld the first-instance judgement relating to an unfair competition claim brought by Feihu Information Technology Tianjin Company and Sohu against Beijing Xiaoyi Interaction Network Technology. Xiaoyi operated an app that could play (...)

The US District Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit rejects claims challenging a medical-surgical distributor’s discount scheme (Suture Express / Cardinal Health / Owens & Micro)
Hausfeld (New York)
Cases in which vertical restraints are challenged under Section 1 of the Sherman Act often require proof that the defendant has “market power”—the power “to force a purchaser to do something that he would not do in a competitive market,” which usually takes the form of a seller’s ability “to (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirms a lower court’s decision and dismisses the complaint due to difficulties to prove the possessed market power and the adverse effects on competition (Suture Express / Cardinal Health / Owens & Micro)
Amgen (Thousand Oaks)
In an antitrust case involving bundled discount on sutures, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision granting summary judgment in favor of defendants Cardinal Health 200, LLC and Owens & Micro Distribution, Inc. The Tenth Circuit held that (...)

The Swedish Patent and Market Court upholds a decision by the Competition Authority to fine a tobacco company for abuse of dominance (Swedish Match)
European Commission - DG COMP (Brussels)
Swedish Competition Authority: Tobacco company Swedish Match fined for abuse of market power* The Patent and Market Court in Sweden has ruled that Swedish Match, a producer of snus tobacco, must pay fines amounting to almost SEK 38 million (€ 4 million) for abusing its dominant position. (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overturns dismissal of an antitrust suit against an investment banking company accused of monopolizing the market for silver futures (Wacker / JP Morgan)
Hausfeld (New York)
In an unsigned summary order in Wacker v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., a Second Circuit panel (Judges Cabranes, Pooler and Lynch) overturned dismissal of an antitrust suit brought by a group of precious metals traders and a hedge fund alleging that JP Morgan unlawfully monopolized the market for (...)

The Italian Administrative Court of Lazio partially upholds the fine imposed on the company managing the Milan airports for abusive practices in the general aviation sector (SEA)
Municipality of Cagliari
Introduction By an appeal judgment released in the SEA v AGCM case , the Administrative Court for the Region of Latium (the Court) has partially upheld the challenged decision made by the Italian Competition Authority (ICA) in Cedicor/SEA , by which the ICA fined the manager of the Milan (...)

The Bulgarian Supreme Administrative Court quashes the Competition Authority’s decision on an abuse of dominance case in the energy sector, due to a different economic analysis (Energo Pro)
Tsvetkova Bebov Komarevski (Sofia)
The Supreme Administrative Court of the Republic of Bulgaria seating in 3-member panel (the “Supreme Administrative Court”, the “Court or the “Supreme Court”) repealed the decision of the Bulgarian Commission for Protection of Competition (the “Commission”) by virtue of which the Commission (...)

The Polish Supreme Court finds that a decision of the Competition Authority and the judgment of the Court of Appeal failed to establish a sufficiently precise relevant market definition to enable the finding of an abuse of dominance in the natural gas sector (PGNiG)
Utrecht University
,
Affre i Wspólnicy (Warsaw)
In the judgment of the Supreme Court (“SC”) of 10 January 2017, (III SK 61/15) concerning the alleged abuse of dominant position by PGNiG S.A. – a Polish natural gas company, the case was referred back to the Court of Appeal in Warsaw (“CA”). The SC found that neither the President of the (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal upholds the Indian Competition Authority’s decision for abuse of dominance against a coal company but cancels the fine due to the company already recently paying fine in a similar case (Sai Wardha Power / Coal India)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT upholds the order passed by CCI against Coal India Limited for abuse of dominance* COMPAT by its order dated December 09, 2016 has upheld the order of CCI whereby it held that Coal India Limited and Western Coalfields Limited were acting independently of the market forces and enjoy (...)

The Ljubljana Court of Appeal annuls a decision concerning minor offense proceedings against a collecting society (SAZAS)
Fatur Menard (Ljubljana)
Introduction In SAZAS case, the Slovenian Competition Protection Office (hereinafter referred to as the CPO) adopted a partial administrative decision in April 2011 (Case 306-35/2009-108), finding that Združenje skladateljev, avtorjev in založnikov za zaščito avtorskih pravic Slovenije (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal requests an investigation into an abuse of dominance by a global taxi services company (Meru Travels Solutions / Uber India)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT directs investigation against Uber India for Abuse of Dominance* COMPAT by its order dated December 7, 2016, has set aside the order dated February 10, 2016 of CCI closing the information filed against Uber India Systems Private Limited (“Uber”) for alleged abuse of dominant position (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal reverses the Competition Authority’s decision and orders an investigation into the national gas supplier for alleged unfair contractual terms (Gipcl Gujarat Industries Power Company / Gail Gas Authority of India)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT orders investigation against Gas Authority of India Limited (GAIL) for abuse of dominance* COMPAT by order dated November 28, 2016 has set aside the order of CCI refusing investigation against GAIL for allegedly incorporating unfair terms and conditions in its gas supply agreements (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal reverses the Indian Competition Authority’s decision for a second time and orders an investigation against movies producers (K Sera Sera Digital Cinema / Digital Cinema Initiatives)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT orders investigation against producers of Hollywood movies* COMPAT by its order dated November 9, 2016 has ordered investigation against 6 producers of Hollywood films for the allegedly forcing a technology, called D-Cinema technology, for providing cinema screening under the auspices (...)

The EU Court of Justice AG Wahl opts for a more effect-based approach on rebates and proposes an annulment of the EU General Court’s judgment (Intel)
Herbert Smith Freehills (Brussels)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Paris)
In Intel’s appeal against the General Court’s judgement of June 2014 (which upheld the Commission’s decision that Intel abused its dominant position by virtue of operating exclusivity rebate schemes – see here for our e-bulletin on the judgment), Advocate General Wahl recommends that the Court (...)

The EU Court of Justice AG Wahl recommends that the Court grant an appeal against the judgment of the General Court, which had upheld a decision of the Commission imposing a fine of €1.06 billion for abuse of a dominant position (Intel)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 20 October 2016, Advocate General Wahl rendered his opinion on Intel’s appeal before the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) against the judgement of the General Court, which had upheld a decision of the European Commission of 13 May 2009 imposing a fine of € 1.06 billion for (...)

The French Supreme Court confirms fines imposed on undertaking for abusive limitation of generic entry (Sanofi-Aventis)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
On 18 October 2016, the French Supreme Court upheld the decision of the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) which had fined the pharmaceutical company Sanofi-Aventis over € 40 million for having abused its dominant position on the market for the active ingredient clopidogrel. Sanofi-Aventis (...)

The Chinese Kunming Intermediate People’s Court decides that a refusal to purchase in the refined oil market is not anticompetitive (Yunnan Yingding Biological Energy / Sinopec)
Hogan Lovells (Beijing)
,
University of Melbourne
,
China Competition Bulletin (Beijing)
On 8 October 2016, the Kunming Intermediate People’s Court amended its first-instance decision in the refusal to deal dispute between Yunnan Yingding Biological Energy, a biodiesel company, and Sinopec’s branch in Yunnan. In December 2014, the court had originally decided the case in the (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recognizes that a product hopping in the face of a “patent cliff” can constitute conduct in violation of the antitrust laws (Mayne / Warner Chilcott / Mylan)
Hausfeld (Philadelphia)
The Third Circuit’s recent product-hopping decision in Mylan Pharm. Inc. v. Warner Chilcott Pub. Ltd. Co (“Doryx”) has been widely criticized by commentators as breaking with established antitrust precedent. Mylan, the last remaining plaintiff in the case following a series of settlements at (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal sends a case back to the Indian Competition Authority for reconsideration of the investigation’s findings (Jaypee Greens)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) set-aside CCI decision exonerating Jaypee Group for abuse of dominance and remands the matter back for re-consideration* COMPAT by its order dated September 28, 2016 has set-aside the order of CCI in which the CCI exonerated Jaypee Group from (...)

The Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court rules on excessive pricing concerning the delivery of electricity (ELSAM III)
University of Copenhagen - Faculty of Law
,
Accura (Copenhagen)
Summary of the case In an August 2016 ruling the Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court (Sø- & Handelsretten) confirmed that the Danish energy incumbent DONG Energy A/S (“DONG”) had infringed Article 102 and the Danish equivalent by charging excessive prices for the delivery of (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s dismissal of abuse of dominance allegations against a mining company in the market for chrome ore (All Odisha Steel Federation / Orissa Mining Corporation)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) upholds CCI order dismissing abuse of dominance allegation against Orissa Mining Corporation (OMC)* COMPAT by its order dated August 30, 2016 has upheld order of CCI which had dismissed allegations of abuse of dominance by OMC has been indulging in (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal upholds the Indian Competition Authority’s dismissal of abuse of dominance allegations against a global telecom provider in the market for international roaming services (Vishwambhar Marutirao Doiphode / Vodafone India)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT upholds CCI order dismissing abuse of dominance allegation against Vodafone* COMPAT by its order dated August 16, 2016 has upheld order of CCI whereby it declined to order an investigation into the allegations of abuse of dominance by Vodafone India for levying exorbitant charges for (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal reverses the Competition Authority’s fine for discriminatory practices against a public undertaking due to objective justification (Indian Exhibition Industry Association / Ministry of Commerce and Industry / India Trade Promotion Organisation)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) sets aside penalty imposed on India Trade Promotion Organization for abuse of dominance* COMPAT by its order dated July 1, 2016 has set aside the penalty imposed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) on India Trade Promotion Organization (ITPO) (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal cancels fine for abuse of dominance against coal company due to the Indian Competition Authority’s failure to uphold the principle of natural justice (Coal India)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT sets-aside penalty of INR 1,773 Crores penalty on Coal India Limited (CIL) by CCI* COMPAT by its order dated May 17, 2016 has set aside CCI’s order dated April 15, 2014 wherein CCI had fined Coal India Limited for imposing unfair and discriminatory conditions in its fuel supply (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit declines to apply the price-cost test to a loyalty discount case in the pharmaceutical sector (Eisai / Sanofi)
Hausfeld (San Francisco)
On May 4, 2016, the Third Circuit—following the principles it set forth in LePage’s, Dentsply, and ZF Meritor—affirmed a decision by District of New Jersey Judge Mary L. Cooper granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant in Eisai, Inc. v. Sanofi-Aventis U.S., LLC. Eisai is the latest (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejects antitrust claims predicated on a supplier’s market-share discount program and other promotional tactics (Eisai / Sanofi)
Hall Render (Washington)
,
Baker Botts (Washington)
,
Gibson Dunn (Washington)
On May 4, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit announced its decision in Eisai, Inc. v. Sanofi Aventis U.S., LLC, rejecting antitrust claims predicated on a supplier’s market-share discount program and other promotional tactics. While the court’s decision adds some definition (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s dismissal of abuse of dominance allegations against an airline company (Air India / InterGlobe Aviation)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT rules that IndiGo’s predatory recruitment of Air India’s trained pilots is not a competition issue but an employment issue* COMPAT by its order dated April 29, 2016 has upheld the CCI order dated February 10, 2016 refusing to intervene in the matter of predatory recruitment of Air (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s dismissal of abuse of dominance allegations against an international airport due to lack of evidence (Airline Operators Committee / Delhi International Airport)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT upholds CCI order dismissing abuse of dominance allegation against Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL)* COMPAT by its order dated April 12, 2016 has upheld order of CCI which had dismissed allegations of abuse of dominance by DIAL in charging licence fee from airlines using the (...)

The Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf rejects an appeal lodged by the German incumbent postal services operator, against a decision of the Federal Cartel Office in an abuse of dominance case (Deutsche Post)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
In a recently published decision of 6 April 2016, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf (“Court”) rejected an appeal lodged by Deutsche Post AG (“DPAG”), Germany’s incumbent postal services operator, against a decision of the German Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”). By decision of 2 July (...)

The Chinese Supreme People’s Court dismisses an application to re-try a case in Shaanxi involving taxis and exclusive dealing (Taxi case)
University of Melbourne
,
China Competition Bulletin (Beijing)
,
Hogan Lovells (Beijing)
On 17 March 2016, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) released its decision to dismiss an application to re-try a case in Shaanxi involving taxis and exclusive dealing. In that case, two private local taxi companies sued three other local taxi companies for exclusive dealing. The SPC made its (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Court confirms the Competition Authority’s decision and prescription concerning the operating systems for smartphones (Google)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
,
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
In March 2016, the Moscow Arbitration Court expressed its support of the position of the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) on the case of abuse of dominance by the Google group of companies involving its actions on the Android operation system. The decision of FAS Russia was taken as (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal upholds the Competition Authority’s decision and clarifies requirements for an interim injunction (Fast Track Call Cab / ANI Technologies / OLA Cabs)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT refuses interim relief to Fast Track Call Cabs in ongoing investigation against Ola for predatory pricing in radio taxi services in Bengaluru* COMPAT by its order dated March 9, 2016 has upheld the CCI order dated September 3, 2015 refusing to grant interim injunction against (...)

The Indian Competition Appellate Tribunal refers the case back to the Competition Authority for investigation and clarifies that governmental health office constitutes an "enterprise" under the Competition Act (Biswanath Prasad Singh / DGHS Director General of Health Services)
Vaish Associates Advocates (New Delhi)
COMPAT directs re-consideration of matter against Director General of Health Services & Others* COMPAT by its order dated March 1, 2016 has set-aside the decision of CCI whereby CCI has refused to order investigation against the Director General Health Services (DGHS) for discriminating (...)

The England & Wales High Court throws out a private claim for damages based on abuse of dominance in the online mapping sector (Streetmap / Google)
Phillips Auctioneers (London)
,
Constantine Cannon (London)
Google wins court battle against StreetMap in the UK*Google won a big victory Friday in the High Court of England and Wales, which ruled that Google did not abuse its dominant position to the detriment of the now-defunct UK online mapping provider, Streetmap.The Court’s ruling against (...)

The England & Wales High Court dismisses a claim for abuse of dominance brought against a Big Tech firm by an online map provider and holds that an alleged harmful effect of a pro-competitive innovation by a dominant company must be significant in the market to constitute an abuse (Streetmap / Google)
Osborne Clarke (London)
Brief summary of facts Streetmap alleged that Google abused its dominant position in the online search and/or online search advertising markets by bundling Google Search with Google Maps, thereby depriving users of an undistorted choice of online mapping services; giving Google Maps an (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal overturns an abuse of dominance ruling in the market for online mapping allowing for the geolocalisation of sales points on company websites (Google / Evermaps)
Ashurst (Milan)
Paris Court of Appeal overturns Google abuse of dominance ruling* On November 25, 2015, the Paris Court of Appeal (PCA) reversed the December 2012 ruling of the Commercial Tribunal of Paris (CTP) , which found that Google (specifically Google France and Google Inc.) abused its dominant (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Court confirms that a pharmaceutical company has abused its dominance by stopping to supply insulin (Novo Nordisk)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Cassation Court confirmed: “Novo Nordisk” violated the antimonopoly law* On 21 October 2015, the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District upheld the ruling of the 9th Arbitration Appeal Court of 29 June 2015 and dismissed a cassation appeal of “Novo Nordisk” against the decision of the (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Court confirms that an electricity provider has abused its dominance in the market of electric power transmission (MRSK Siberia)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Arbitration Court supported Kemerovo OFAS in a dispute with “MRSK Siberia”* Arbitration Court of the Kemerovo Region pronounced legitimacy and determination of the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service in the Kemerovo Region (Kemerovo OFAS) with regard to “MRSK Siberia” OJSC. The (...)

The Croatian High Administrative Court rules on the lack of capacity for the national central bank to file a claim against a decision of the Competition Authority (HNB)
Croatian Competition Agency (Zagreb)
High Administrative Court dismisses the claim filed by the Croatian National Bank against the CCA decision* The High Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia dismissed the claim filed by the Croatian National Bank (HNB) against the decision of the Croatian Competition Agency (CCA) on (...)

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upholds that a college athletics association’s restrictions on compensation should be subject to antitrust scrutiny (O’Bannon / NCAA)
Constantine Cannon (New York)
NCCA Gains Ground Against Student-Athletes In Appeal Of O’Bannon Case* Last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the NCAA may restrict colleges from compensating student-athletes beyond the cost of attendance, handing the NCAA a partial victory in its (...)

The South African Competition Tribunal addresses its first predatory pricing case in the newspaper market (Media24)
Wallonia-Brussels Trade Commission - AWEX (Johannesburg)
First predatory pricing case before the Competition Tribunal* A year ago, we at AAT reported on the intervention by competitors in the merger between Media24 and Paarl Media. Today, we want to highlight a “one-year-later” feature about that same company, which has now been found liable of (...)

The Latvian Administrative Regional Court upholds the decision of the Competition Authority that fined and imposed remedies on the national gas supplier in a case of abuse of dominance (Latvijas Gāze)
Latvian Competition Council (Riga)
Court agrees with the Competition Authority to fine the National Gas Supplier* On 2 September, the Administrative Regional Court confirmed the Competition Council’s (CC) decision to impose the only natural gas supplier in Latvia – AS "Latvijas Gāze" – remedies to change the practice of debt (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Court confirms the fine imposed on a company for abuse of dominance in the market of cards for tachographs (NIIAT)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Arbitration Court: “NIIAT” OJSC will pay a fined to fixing monopolistically high prices for AETR tachograph* On 28 July 2015, Moscow Arbitration Court pronounced legitimacy of FAS decision to fine “NIIAT” OJSC 737,500 RUB for abusing dominance. In September 2014, the Federal Antimonopoly (...)

The EU Court of Justice finds that a holder of a standard-essential patent may abuse a dominant position by seeking to enjoin infringement (Huawei / ZTE)
Norton Rose Fulbright (Brussels)
,
Peter Camesasca Advocaat (Brussels)
On July 16, 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU” or “the Court”) issued its long-awaited judgment in Huawei Technology Co. Ltd v ZTE Corp., ZTE Deutschland GmbH. The CJEU found that the holder of a standard essential patent (“SEP”) may, in certain circumstances, abuse its (...)

The EU Court of Justice rules on the seeking of injunctions in the context of standard-essential patents encumbered by FRAND in the technology sector (Huawei / ZTE)
Norton Rose Fulbright (Brussels)
,
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer (Brussels)
THE EUROPEAN UNION’S HIGHEST COURT RULES ON STANDARD-ESSENTIAL PATENTS INJUNCTIONS AND ABUSE OF DOMINANCE* The long-awaited ruling on the seeking of injunctions in the context of standard-essential patents encumbered by fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms has been (...)

The EU Court of Justice confirms practical steps to be taken by standard-essential patent holders before seeking injunctions (Huawei / ZTE)
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
Synopsis The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that the holder of a Standard Essential Patent that has committed to license its Standard Essential Patent on FRAND terms may be found in breach of the competition rules (Article 102 TFEU) by seeking an injunction against a (...)

The Slovenian Supreme Court sets aside the judgment of the Administrative Court on the abuse of a dominant position in the telecommunications sector (Telekom Slovenije)
Rojs, Peljhan, Prelesnik & partnerji (Ljubljana)
By its decision ref. no. X Ips 58/2015 of 15 July 2015 the Slovenian Supreme Court set aside the first instance judgment and referred the case back to the Administrative Court due to its lack of economic analysis of the abuse and of its impact on consumer welfare. Thereby the Supreme Court (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Appeal Court confirms a fine imposed on a gas provider for abuse of dominance (Sakhatrnasneftegaz)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Appeal Court confirmed the conclusions of Yakutia OFAS* The 4th Arbitration Appeal Court supported the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service in the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) (Yakutia OFAS Russia) in a dispute with “Sakhatrnasneftegaz” OJSC. Earlier the regulator found that the company (...)

The Spanish High Court issues landmark judgment on the need to establish foreclosure effects of a margin squeeze (Correos)
Linklaters (Madrid)
,
Linklaters (Madrid)
1 Introduction On 21 January 2014, the Spanish Markets and Competition Commission (“CNMC”) imposed a fine of €8,170,000 on the Spanish postal service incumbent Sociedad Estatal Correos y Telégrafos, S.A. (“Correos) for allegedly abusing its dominant position on the wholesale market for (...)

The Spanish High Court annuls the decision of the Spanish Competition Authority fining the public postal operator for an abuse of dominant position consisting on margin squeeze due to lack of evidence (Correos)
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
,
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
,
Callol, Coca & Asociados (Madrid)
On 21 January 2014, the NMCC fined € 8.17 million on Correos for abusing its dominant position on the wholesale market for postal services (access to the postal network) and on the retail market for postal services involving large senders (business customers) in Spain. The (...)

The Milan Court of Appeal overturns a judgment on screen scraping and intermediation of online travel agencies and rejects the allegations of abuse of dominance by an airline (Lastminute / Viaggiare / Ryanair)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
,
Nunziante Magrone (Rome)
Introduction With two judgements delivered on June 2015 regarding cases brought by Lastminute.com S.r.l. and Viaggiare S.r.l. respectively against Ryanair , the Court of Appeal of Milan held that Ryanair’s refusal to grant travel agencies the right of intermediating its tickets does not (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Appeal Court confirms the fine imposed on a pharmaceutical company for abuse of dominance (Novo Nordisk)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Appeal Court confirmed: “Novo Nordisk” violated the antimonopoly law* On 22 June 2015, the 9th Arbitration Appeal Court upheld the judgment of the Court of First Instance and pronounced legitimacy of the decision of the Federal Arbitration Service (FAS Russia) that “Novo Nordisk” Ltd. had (...)

The Russian Arbitration Court confirms the decision of the Competition Authority which concluded that a pharmaceutical company has abused its dominance (Baxter)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Cassation Court: FAS decision and determination regarding “Baxter” are legitimate* On 16 June 2015, the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District (Cassation Court) confirmed legitimacy of the decision and determination of the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) as well as the Order to (...)

The Latvian Supreme Court upholds the Competition Authority’s decision on the establishment of abuse of dominance in retail trade in the market of beauty and household goods (Drogas)
Vilgerts (Riga)
On 15 June 2015 the Supreme Court of Latvia upheld the Latvian Competition Council’s “LCC”) decision against AS “Drogas” ( “Drogas”), a leading beauty and household goods retail trade chain operator, on establishment of abuse of dominance in retail trade in the market of beauty and household (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Appeal Court confirms the fine imposed on a pharmaceutical company for abuse of dominance (Teva)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Appeal Court confirmed legitimacy of the fine upon TEVA* On 11 June 2015, the 9th Arbitration Appeal Court dismissed the appeal filed by TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED (Israel) against FAS definition (1) to hold TEVA administratively liable for failure to execute a determination. (...)

The Russian Federal Arbitration Court of the North-Western Federal District confirms the fine imposed on a company for creating discriminatory conditions in the retail market (Lenta)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Court confirmed legitimacy of the 2-million fine for “Lenta”* The Federal Arbitration Court of the North-Western Federal District confirmed legitimacy of the determination of the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service in St Petersburg (St Petersburg OFAS Russia) on an administrative fine (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Court confirms that a cement producer has abused its dominance in Crimea (Stroiindustria)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Arbitration Court supported FAS in a dispute with “Stroiindustria” Bakhchisaray Construction Enterprise”* Moscow Arbitration Court pronounced legitimacy and reasonableness of the decision and determination issued by the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) on the case against (...)

The Italian Supreme Court opens the doors to standalone private actions (Cargest)
BonelliErede (Rome)
,
Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition (Munich)
In its decision of 6 June 2015 the Italian Supreme Court annulled the previous decision of the Court of Appeal of Rome , which had rejected the claim brought by a number of fruit and vegetable wholesalers (the “Wholesalers”) against Cargest - the company that manages the fruit and vegetable (...)

The Italian Supreme Court applies the principles of Directive 2014/104/EU in favor of claimants in a stand-alone case concerning an abuse of dominant position (Cargest)
Studio Legale Scoccini (Rome)
,
Il Sole 24 Ore (Milan)
Introduction On the 4th of June 2015, the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation (hereinafter referred to as “ISC”) overruled a judgment of the Court of Appeal of Rome concerning a claim brought by 52 food distributors against Cargest Srl because of an abuse of dominant position by the (...)

The Guangdong High People’s Court hears the appeal of one of China’s first administrative monopoly cases (Guangdong Education Department / Shenzhen Sware Technology)
University of Melbourne
,
China Competition Bulletin (Beijing)
,
Hogan Lovells (Beijing)
One of China’s first administrative monopoly court cases heard in Guangdong* On 28 May 2015, the Guangdong High People’s Court heard the appeal of the administrative monopoly case against the Guangdong Education Department filed by Shenzhen Sware Technology. The court is expected to announce (...)

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismisses claims of conspiracy to protect a monopoly by "product hopping", citing risk to slow or halt pharmaceutical innovation (Mylan / Warner Chilcott)
BakerHostetler (Philadelphia)
Product Hopping and Antitrust: Mylan Court Dismisses Claims on Summary Judgment, Citing Need to Avoid Chilling Pharmaceutical Innovation* A recent summary judgment opinion from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania breaks new ground in the developing antitrust law on “product hopping” claims. (...)

The East Kazakhstan Judicial Appeal Board fines a group of companies for refusing to conclude a contract with the customer (AES Ust-Kamenogorsk HPP / AES Shulba HPP / AES Sogrinsk CHP / AES Ust-Kamenogorsk CHP)
Center for Development and Protection of Competition Policy (Astana)
,
Kazakhstan Association of Mining and Metallurgical Companies (Astana)
,
Center for Development and Protection of Competition Policy (Astana)
On April 13, 2015 Judicial Appeal Board on civil and administrative cases of East Kazakhstan region considered the petition of appeal filed by “AES Ust-Kamenogorsk HPP” LLP against the order of the specialized administrative court of Ust-Kamenogorsk dated March 16, 2015 (Court of first (...)

The Lisbon Appeal Court confirms €2.7 million fine for discriminatory pricing under the national equivalent of Art. 102 TFEU and revolutionizes access to information for third parties (Sport TV)
University of Lisbon
On 11 March 2015, the Lisbon Appeal Court (LAC) rejected all arguments put forward by the appellant and confirmed the judgment of the Competition, Regulation and Supervision Court (CSRC) of 4 June 2014, which had, in turn, confirmed (with a reduction of the fine, from 3.7 to 2.7 million EUR) (...)

The Lisbon Court of Appeal upholds the decision of the Portuguese Competition Authority against a sports channel for abuse of dominance in the market of conditional-access premium sports TV channels (Sport TV)
Portuguese Competition Authority (Lisbon)
Portuguese Competition Authority’s decision against Sport TV confirmed by the Lisbon Court of Appeal* The Lisbon Court of Appeal confirmed the Portuguese Competition Authority’s (PCA) decision against Sport TV for abusing its dominant position in the market of conditional-access premium (...)

The US District Court for the District of Maryland upholds an antitrust action against a patent troll (Intellectual Ventures / Capital One)
Rutgers University (New Brunswick)
This article has been nominated for the 2016 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On March 2, 2015, Judge Paul W. Grimm of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland offered a wide-ranging analysis of antitrust claims against the (...)

The US District Court for the Northern District of California dismisses an antitrust claim for lack of proof of both the conduct and the injury (Google)
DLA Piper Weiss-Tessbach (Vienna)
Two recent victories for Google in the United States* On 20 February 2015 a federal judge in California dismissed an antitrust lawsuit against Google alleging that it violated antitrust laws by requiring makers of Android tablets and smartphones to designate Google as the default search (...)

The US District Court for the District of Maryland reminds the need for a harmonious and supportable market definition to win an antitrust case (Live Nation)
Constantine Cannon (Washington)
Federal Court Rings Down The Curtain On Baltimore-D.C. Rock Promoters’ Antitrust Case Against Live Nation* A long-running antitrust battle of the bands between a Baltimore-D.C. area regional concert promoter and venue operator and the concert colossus Live Nation got the hook in the U.S. (...)

The Russian Arbitration Court of Appeal confirms that a pharmaceutical company has abused its dominance (Baxter)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Appeal Court supported FAS arguments on the case against “Baxter” CJSC* On 17 February 2015, the 9th Arbitration Appeal Court confirmed legitimacy of the decision and determination of the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) on the antimonopoly case against “Baxter” CJSC, and a (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Court confirms that a company has abused its dominance in the market of mine rescue services (Mine Rescue Brigade)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
The Court confirmed legitimacy of FAS decision with regard to “Mine Rescue Brigade”* On 25 December 2014, Moscow Arbitration Court pronounced legitimacy of reasonableness of the decision of the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) on the case against “Mine Rescue Brigade” Federal State (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Court confirms that a distributor has abused its dominance by creating discriminatory conditions in determining the costs of goods advertising services (ATAK)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Cassation Court confirmed that creating discriminatory conditions for advertising goods in the “ATAK” stores are unlawful* On 18 December 2014, the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District supported the arguments put forward by the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) against “ATAK” (...)

The EU Court of Justice AG Wathelet states that holding a standard essential patent does not mean a company is dominant (Huawei / ZTE)
Peter Camesasca Advocaat (Brussels)
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (Brussels)
The Reference On 5 April 2013, the Landgericht Düsseldorf referred questions relating to injunctive relief over standard-essential patents (“SEPs”) to the Court of Justice (“CJEU”) in connection with a patent dispute between Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd (“Huawei”) and ZTE Corp., ZTE (...)

The Paris Court of Appeal reduces the fine imposed by the Competition Authority on the national railway for abuse of dominance (SNCF)
Herbert Smith Freehills (Paris)
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (Paris)
In its decision no. 12-D-25 of 18 December 2012, the Autorité de la Concurrence (the French competition authority - "FCA") fined the French national railway SNCF nearly EUR 61 million for 5 counts of abusive practices in the railway freight sector and ordered the company to cease the (...)

The Chinese Supreme Court issues the first decision based on the economic analysis under Anti-Monopoly Law (Qihoo / Tencent)
Deacons (Hong Kong)
On October 16, 2014, the Chinese Supreme People’s Court (SPC) announced its ruling on the landmark antitrust litigation brought by Qihoo 360 against Tencent. The decision marked the SPC’s first ruling on a matter filed under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (AML), which came into effect in August (...)

The Chinese Supreme Court sets up the standard for antitrust private litigation with a detailed analysis method regarding market definition and dominance establishment (Qihoo / Tencent)
AnJie Broad Law (Beijing)
,
AnJie Broad Law (Beijing)
When the Antitrust Encounter the Internet: The Legal Battle between Qihoo 360 and Tencent Finally Comes to the End* The outgoing year has witnessed the significantly increasing role of „Antitrust‟ and „Internet‟ played in China‟s economy. With the Supreme People‟s Court („SPC‟) ratified the (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Appeal Court confirms that the behavior of an Authority has created disadvantages and has resulted in the monopolization of the relevant market (Cheboksary Authority / Cash Settlement Centre)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Appeal Court: Cheboksary Authority created advantages for “Cash Settlement Centre” OJSC in the prejudice of a competitor* On 8th October 2014, the 9th Arbitration Appeal Court upheld the judgment of Moscow Arbitration Court that the decision and determination on the case on violating the (...)

The Chinese Supreme Court elaborates detailed fundamental principles of anti-monopoly law, in particular in the context of abuse of dominance on the internet market, in its first anti-monopoly case (Qihoo / Tencent)
King & Wood Mallesons (Beijing)
,
King & Wood Mallesons (Beijing)
The Supreme Court Goes Online with Anti-Monopoly Law Principles:A Review of Qihoo v.s. Tencent Abuse of Market Dominance Case* Introduction On 15 November 2011, Qihoo issued proceedings against Tencent in the Guangdong Higher Court, asserting that Tencent had abused its dominant position, (...)

The Czech Regional Court in Brno confirms the Czech NCA’s decision having imposed penalty for predatory pricing in bus passenger transport (Student Agency)
Skils (Prague)
On 25 September 2014, the Regional Court in Brno confirmed findings of the Office for Protection of Competition (“Office”) regarding predatory pricing by Student Agency (a leading bus transport company) and rejected judicial review claim lodged by the said company. The Regional Court in Brno (...)

The Russian Arbitration Court confirms the warning addressed to a pharmaceutical company that refused to supply the unique medicine for treating renal deficiency by peritoneal dialysis (Baxter)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
Actions of “Baxter” CJSC are pronounced unlawful* On 25th September 2014, Moscow Arbitration Court confirmed legitimacy of the decision and determination of the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) in the case against “Baxter” CJSC for violating the antimonopoly law. The company refused (...)

The Italian Administrative Supreme Court reinstates a decision issued by the Competition Authority accepting commitments by the dominant satellite TV company regarding the discriminatory conditions of access to its broadcasting platform (Sky Italia)
Legance - Studio Legale (Rome)
By judgement no. 4773 of 22 September 2014, the Italian Supreme Administrative Court (“Consiglio di Stato”) upheld an appeal brought by Sky Italia s.r.l. (“Sky”) and the Italian Competition Authority (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, “AGCM”) and reinstated the AGCM decision (...)

The Moscow Arbitration Court confirms the warnings addressed to air carriers that have a dominant position on some markets (Aeroflot / Russian Airlines)
Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (Moscow)
FAS warnings are legitimate* On 15th September 2014, Moscow Arbitration Court dismissed the claim of “Aeroflot – Russian Airlines” OJSC to invalidate a warning of the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia). In April 2014, the Antimonopoly Service issued warnings to air carriers that (...)