Parallel trade : ECJ Advocate General Colomer is of the opinion that partial refusal is not a per se abuse, but intention to stop parallel trade creates a strong presumption of abuse (Lélos/Glaxosmithkline)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Conclusions AG Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, 1 April 2008, Sot. Lélos Kai Sia E.E. v. Glaxosmithkline, cases C-468/06 to C-478/06 It is not customary to report the conclusions of an Advocate General in a case-law column. However, even in such a column, exceptional circumstances call for exceptional treatment. It has to be said that we are faced with a situation which, to the best of our knowledge, is unprecedented. The questions referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling in the present case are identical to those already referred to it by the Greek competition authority in Syfait (ECJ, 31 May 2005, Syfait and Others, C 53/03, ECR p. I-4609, paragraph 2).. They