LEGAL PRACTICE: PROCEDURES - SANCTIONS - COMPENSATION - JURISDICTION - HARM - INQUIRIES - PRESCRIPTION

Private enforcement of antitrust law in France (Sept. 2018 - June 2019)

The commented decisions indicate the recurrent nature of procedural questions, especially those pertinent to national and international competence. Other decisions confirm the ever-growing litigation about compensation applying to the administrative court as well as the importance of the harm updating before the judicial court. An interesting decision in principle by the German Supreme Court on the suspensive effect of the statute of limitations of competition authorities’ investigative acts should also be noted.

Sélection de décisions rendues dans la période sous commentaire. Les décisions commentées sont marquées d’un astérisque, les autres sont simplement citées pour information et il est fait brièvement état de leur intérêt. CJUE, 24 oct. 2018, Apple Sales International, aff. C-595/17, ECLI:EU:C:2018:854*CJUE, 28 mars 2019, Cogeco c/ Sport TV Portugal et al., aff. C-637/17, ECLI:EU:C:2019:263*CJUE, 14 mars 2019, Vantaan kaupunki c/ Skanska Industrial Solutions Oy et al., aff. C-724/17, ECLI:EU:C:2019:204*CAELE, 17 sept. 2018, Nye Kystlink AS/Color Group AS et Color Line AS, aff. E-10/17Cass 1re civ., 30 janv. 2019, no16-25.259 ; Bull. civ. I, no 84, ECLI:FR:CCASS:2019:C100084CAA Bordeaux, 5e ch., 19 mars 2019, Département de la Charente-Maritime c/ Stés Laporte Service Route et al., no 17BX01521CA

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • University Paris V Descartes

Quotation

Rafael P. Amaro, Private enforcement of antitrust law in France (Sept. 2018 - June 2019), September 2019, Concurrences Review N° 3-2019, Art. N° 91223, pp. 230-246

Visites 525

All reviews