Résultats de la recherche

26 Nov 2020 B

The Regional Court of Düsseldorf refers questions regarding the licensing of standard essential patents in multi-layered supply chains to the EU Court of Justice (Nokia / Daimler)

Katharina Bongs • November 2020

On 26 November 2020, the Regional Court of Düsseldorf (“Düsseldorf Court”) decided to request a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) in patent infringement proceedings involving Nokia and Daimler. The questions give the ECJ the opportunity to offer guidance on (...)

26 Nov 2020 B

The Regional Court of Düsseldorf questions the EU Court of Justice on standard essential patents licensing in supply chains (Nokia / Daimler)

Lars Mesenbrink, Jay Jurata, Julius Schradin • November 2020

In a decision of November 26, 2020 in a patent infringement case of Nokia Technologies Oy against Daimler AG, the Düsseldorf Regional Court (file number 4c O 17/19) referred several questions to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) regarding the licensing of standard essential patents (SEPs) (...)

25 nov. 2020 R

Abus de position dominante : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne étend aux festivals sa jurisprudence permissive autorisant les sociétés de gestion collective à imposer un barème de redevances calculé sur la base des recettes brutes tirées de la vente des billets d’entrée dans des discothèques et sur les recettes des émissions de télévision destinées au grand public (SABAM / Weareone.World, Wecandance)

Alain Ronzano • N° 4-2020

Le 25 novembre 2020, la Cour de justice de l’Union a rendu un arrêt dans l’affaire C-372/19 (SABAM), laquelle fait suite à la demande de décision préjudicielle formée par le Tribunal de l’entreprise d’Anvers à propos de la rémunération demandée aux festivals de musique par un organisme de gestion des (...)

25 Nov 2020 B

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)

Dilja Helgadottir • November 2020

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 (...)

25 Nov 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice states that the fee structure for music played at festivals adopted by collecting societies is not necessarily abusive (SABAM)

Peter L’Ecluse, Valerie Lefever • November 2020

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 before (...)

24 nov. 2020 R

Effet utile : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne considère que le juge national est tenu d’ordonner à son bénéficiaire le paiement d’intérêts au titre de la période d’illégalité de cette aide, quand bien même ladite aide aurait ultérieurement été déclarée compatible avec le marché intérieur et le bénéficiaire serait une entreprise chargée de la gestion d’un SIEG (Viasat Broadcasting UK / TV2 Danmark)

Alain Ronzano • N° 4-2020

Le 24 novembre 2020, la Cour de justice de l’Union a rendu un arrêt dans l’affaire C-445/19 (Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd contre TV2/Danmark A/S) à la suite d’une demande de décision préjudicielle introduite par la Cour d’appel de la région Est du Danemark à propos du financement du service public de (...)

28 oct. 2020 R

Plafond de minimis : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne précise les règles applicables aux entreprises dépassant le plafond de minimis de 200 000 euros sur trois ans en raison du cumul avec des aides obtenues antérieurement (INAIL / Zennaro)

Alain Ronzano • N° 4-2020

Le 28 octobre 2020, la Cour de justice de l’union a rendu un arrêt dans l’affaire C-608/19 (INAIL), laquelle fait suite à une demande de décision préjudicielle introduite par le Conseil d’État italien, portant sur l’interprétation des articles 3 et 6 du règlement n° 1407/2013 de la Commission du 18 (...)

28 Oct 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice clarifies conditions under which request for de minimis aid can be modified to comply with the ceiling (INAIL / Zennaro)

Francesco Pili, Markus Wellinger • October 2020

On 28 October 2020, the Court of Justice (“ECJ”) answered a reference for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Council of State, Italy) concerning the interpretation of Articles 3 and 6 of Regulation (EU) No 1407/2013 of 18 December 2013 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 (...)

21 oct. 2020 R

Environnement : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne estime que le dispositif français de recyclage et de traitement des déchets issus de produits textiles, du linge de maison et des chaussures ne doit pas, en principe, être regardé comme une aide d’État (Eco TLC)

Alain Ronzano • N° 4-2020

Le 21 octobre 2020, la Cour de justice de l’Union a rendu un arrêt dans l’affaire C-556/19 (Société Eco TLC contre Ministre de la transition écologique et solidaire) qui fait suite à une demande de décision préjudicielle formée par le Conseil d’État français. Au cœur de la présente affaire se trouve le (...)

21 Oct 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the concept of “State resources” concerning financial contributions collected by an authorized private eco-body (Eco TLC)

Francesco Pili, Markus Wellinger • October 2020

On 21 October 2020, the Court of Justice answered a request for a preliminary ruling made by the French Conseil d’État (“Council of State”), which raised interesting questions with regard to the notion of “State resources” within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU. The background of the case (...)

24 sept. 2020 R

Aide compatible : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne précise la qualification de PME au sens du règlement d’exemption par catégorie n° 651/2014, particulièrement au regard du critère d’indépendance (NMI Technologietransfer / EuroNorm)

Alain Ronzano • N° 4-2020

Le 24 septembre 2020, la Cour de justice de l’Union a rendu un arrêt dans l’affaire C-516/19 (NMI Technologietransfer GmbH contre EuroNorm GmbH), qui fait suite à une demande de décision préjudicielle introduite par le Tribunal administratif de Berlin, à propos de la définition de Petites et moyennes (...)

24 sept. 2020 R

Notion de PME : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne clarifie la définition des petites et moyennes entreprises au sens du règlement général d’exemption par catégorie, en particulier le concept d’indépendance dans ce contexte (NMI Technologietransfer / EuroNorm)

Jacques Derenne, Ciara Barbu-O’Connor • N° 4-2020 • pp. 181-183

Le 24 septembre 2020, la Cour de justice a rendu un arrêt préjudiciel (sur renvoi du tribunal administratif de Berlin) sur la définition des petites et moyennes entreprises (“PME”) au sens de l’article 3, paragraphe 4, de l’annexe I du règlement n° 651/2014 déclarant certaines catégories d’aides (...)

17 Sep 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice declares invalid a Commission decision penalizing France for State aid (Ministre de l’Agriculture et de l’Alimentation / Compagnie des pêches de Saint-Malo)

European Court of Justice • September 2020

Seized with an interpretation request concerning the arrangements for implementing a Commission decision penalising France for State Aid declared incompatible with the common market, the Court of Justice rules that the decision is invalid* The Commission erred in law in considering that the (...)

17 sept. 2020 R

Avantage : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne estime, à propos des mesures en faveur des pêcheurs de l’Ouest de la France, que la condition tenant à l’existence d’un avantage procuré à une entreprise faisait défaut et que la Commission européenne ne pouvait qualifier d’aide d’État la mesure d’allégement des charges salariales répercutée aux salariés (Compagnie des pêches de Saint-Malo)

Alain Ronzano • N° 4-2020

Le 17 septembre 2020, la Cour de justice de l’Union a rendu son arrêt dans l’affaire C‑212/19 (Ministre de l’Agriculture et de l’Alimentation contre Compagnie des pêches de Saint-Malo), concernant la demande de décision préjudicielle formée par le Conseil d’État français à propos de l’interprétation de (...)

17 Sep 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice clarifies some aspects of State aid related to social security contributions (Ministre de l’Agriculture et de l’Alimentation / Compagnie de pêche de Saint-Malo)

Markus Wellinger, Francesco Pili • September 2020

On 17 September 2020, the Court of Justice (the “ECJ” or “Court”) answered several questions raised by a request for a preliminary ruling from the French Conseil d’État, with regard to the interpretation of Commission Decision 2005/239/EC (the “Decision at issue”). This Decision concerned certain aid (...)

17 sept. 2020 R

Électricité : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne estime incompatible avec le traité une législation imposant aux producteurs d’électricité nationaux d’offrir l’intégralité de l’électricité disponible sur les plateformes gérées par un seul opérateur désigné pour les services d’échange du marché national de l’électricité (ANRE)

Francesco Martucci • N° 4-2020 • pp. 210-212

Par un arrêt en date du 17 septembre 2020, la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne considère qu’une législation roumaine interprétée par l’autorité de régulation en ce sens qu’elle impose aux producteurs d’électricité nationaux d’offrir l’intégralité de l’électricité disponible sur les plateformes gérées par (...)

16 sept. 2020 R

Compétence : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne dit pour droit que la Commission nationale des marchés et de la concurrence espagnole n’a pas qualité de « juridiction » et ne peut donc introduire une demande de décision préjudicielle (Anesco)

Alain Ronzano • N° 4-2020

Le 16 septembre 2020, la Cour de justice de l’Union a de nouveau statué sur la question de la qualité de « juridiction » au sens de l’article 267 TFUE d’une entité qui a introduit auprès d’elle une demande de décision préjudicielle. Il s’agit de l’affaire C-462/19 (Anesco e.a.). On se souvient qu’en (...)

16 Sep 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice holds the preliminary ruling of the Spanish Competition Authority inadmissible due to the fact that the Competition Authority is not a ‘court or tribunal’ for the purpose of Article 267 TFEU (Anesco)

Lena Hornkohl • September 2020

National Competition Authorities and Article 267 TFEU: the ECJ’s take on the referral by the Spanish Commission on Markets and Competition and its implications* Introduction and summary In the recent Anesco case, the ECJ held the preliminary request of the Spanish National Commission on (...)

16 Sep 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice holds that the Spanish Competition Authority cannot be characterized as a "court or tribunal" (Anesco)

Margot Vogels, Andreas Reindl • September 2020

On 16 September 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “ECJ”) delivered a judgment in which it ruled on the status of “court or tribunal” within the meaning of Article 267 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union of a body which has submitted a reference for a preliminary (...)

16 sept. 2020 R

Renvoi préjudiciel : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne déclare irrecevable une demande de décision préjudicielle émanant de l’Autorité espagnole de la concurrence (Anesco)

Pascal Cardonnel • N° 4-2020 • pp. 198-199

Quelle que puisse être l’importance d’une question préjudicielle, la Cour ne l’examinera que si elle provient d’une “juridiction d’un État membre”, au sens de l’article 267 TFUE. En l’occurrence, l’importance de la question adressée à la Cour dans l’affaire Anesco ne fait pas de doute. Les conventions (...)

15 Sep 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice addresses how incompatibility with net neutrality shall be assessed under the relevant legislation regarding open internet access (Telenor Magyarország / Nemzeti Média- és Hírközlési Hatóság Elnöke)

Gönenç Gürkaynak, Barış Yüksel, Baran Can Yıldırım • September 2020

The Court of Justice of the European Union (“ CJEU ”), in its recent decision with regard to the two joint cases (C‐807/18 and C‐39/19) brought before it for preliminary ruling, addressed how incompatibility with net neutrality shall be assessed under the relevant legislation regarding open (...)

14 Sep 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice receives a request for preliminary ruling on restrictions for high-quality products regarding the block exemption regulation (Visma)

Päivi Tammilehto • September 2020

A selective distribution system consists of a supplier selecting distributors based on specific, pre-determined criteria while committing to sell the products or services in question only to selected distributors. These distributors commit not to sell such products or services to unauthorised (...)

10 Sep 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe considers that the special jurisdiction rule for tort disputes under Brussels I Bis applies to civil liability actions based on an infringement of competition law (Wikingerhof)

Anna Jorna, Andreas Reindl • September 2020

On 10 September 2020, Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe rendered his non-binding opinion in the context of a preliminary reference request from the German Federal Court of Justice on the interpretation of Article 7(2) of Regulation 1215/2012 (“Brussels I Bis”). This Article provides that in (...)

3 Sep 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice rules that a restriction imposed by Italian law on acquisitions in the broadcasting and audiovisual sectors is contrary to EU Law (Vivendi / Mediaset)

Denis Fosselard, Gabriele Accardo, Giulia Carnazza • September 2020

On 3 September 2020, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") ruled that a restriction imposed by an Italian law on acquisitions in the broadcasting and audiovisual sectors is contrary to the fundamental EU law principle of the freedom of establishment enshrined in Article 49 of the Treaty on the (...)

20 Jul 2020 B

The Italian Supreme Administrative Court 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)

Federico Marini Balestra, Lucia Antonazzi • July 2020

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 (...)

15 Jun 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice receives a request for preliminary ruling from the Léon Court of Appeal on the temporal application of the damages directive provisions on limitation and quantification of harm (Volvo / DAF Trucks)

Vasil Savov, Juraj Siska, Natacha Espelta • June 2020

In the aftermath of Directive 2014/104/EU (Directive), Spain appears to be one of the most active jurisdictions dealing with antitrust damages cases. In particular, a multitude of Spanish courts have been seized with actions for compensation in relation to the European Trucks Cartel (Case (...)

12 Jun 2020 B

A Spanish Regional Court requests a preliminary ruling on the possibility of the retroactive application of the provisions concerning the period of limitation to bring damages action (Volvo / Trucks)

Patricia Linan Hernandez, Candela Sotés Macaya • June 2020

The application of the transitional regime of the Damages Directive (No. 2014/104), of 26 November 2014, has created legal uncertainty regarding the statute of limitations of damages claims. On 12 June 2020, the Regional Court of León referred questions to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) (...)

8 May 2020 B

The Spanish Competition Authority identifies competition problems in the fifth stowage market’s framework agreement in the port state sector

Candela Sotés Macaya, Patricia Linan Hernandez • May 2020

Since the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") judgment in 2014 in case Commission v. Spain (C-576/13), which declared the Spanish regime for stevedores incompatible with the freedom of establishment, there has been a progressive modification of the national regulation in order to liberalise the (...)

5 May 2020 B

The German Federal Supreme Court rules that the European Central Bank should have explicitly considered whether there was an appropriate balance between the monetary policy effects of the Public Sector Purchase Programme and the economic effects, and the ruling denies the primacy of EU law over the German Basic Law (Dr. W... a.e.)

Jeremy Bernard • May 2020

On 5 May 2020, the German Federal Constitutional Court sitting in Karlsruhe adopted its Dr. W... e.a. ruling by seven votes to one which results in a genuine declaration of war at the Court of Justice of the European Union. Dr. W… e.a. denies the primacy of EU law over the German Basic Law and (...)

2 Apr 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice confirms the limitations that apply before courts are able to classify anticompetitive agreements as a restriction of competition by object under Art 101 TFEU in a multilateral interchange fee credit card transaction (Budapest Bank)

Duncan Liddell, Alexi Dimitriou, Donald Slater, Denis Fosselard • April 2020

On 2 April 2020, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") delivered its judgment in Budapest Bank on a reference for a preliminary ruling from Hungary’s highest court. The judgment confirms the important limitations that apply before competition authorities and courts are able classify (...)

2 Apr 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice emphasises the need for a case and context-specific evaluation of ’by object’ restrictions and provides guidance on what sort of evidence is relevant, in a multilateral interchange fee credit card transaction (Budapest Bank)

Christian Ritz, Johanna Brock-Wenzek • April 2020

I. Introduction On 2 April 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") delivered its judgment in Budapest Bank, another key ruling on the assessment of 'by object' restrictions of competition within the meaning of Article 101(1) TFEU. With this judgment, the (...)

2 Apr 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice ascertains whether the multilateral interchange fee set by the banks for credit card transactions with a merchant pursued no objective other than a simple price increase (Budapest Bank)

Richard Burton • April 2020

On 2 April 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Court of Justice”) delivered a preliminary ruling in which it provided clarifications and guidance to the Kúria (Supreme Court of Hungary) on the distinction between restrictions of competition “by object” and “by effect” under (...)

2 Apr 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice finds, following a preliminary reference, that certain interchange fees imposed by a bank payable on cross-border card transaction within the EEA are anticompetitive (Budapest Bank)

Lesley Hannah • April 2020

On 2 April, the European Court of Justice (“CJEU”) issued a judgment arising from a preliminary reference from the Hungarian Supreme Court concerning a 2009 decision by the Hungarian Competition Authority against Visa Europe Ltd (“Visa”), MasterCard Europe SA (“MasterCard”) and a number of (...)

2 Apr 2020 B

The Austrian Supreme Cartel Court requests preliminary ruling from the EU Court of Justice concerning territorial agreements in connection with the sale of industrial sugar (Zuckercartell)

Austrian Competition Authority • April 2020

Supreme Cartel Court submits questions to European Court of Justice in the appeals procedure concerning territorial agreements in connection with the sale of industrial sugar* In the cartel case on territorial agreements in connection with the sale of industrial sugar, Vienna Higher Regional (...)

2 Apr 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice confirms a strict interpretation of the notion of infringement by object (Budapest Bank)

Pedro Callol, Manuel Canadas Bouwen, Jorge Manzarbeitia, Enrique Fayos, Laura Moya • April 2020

On April 2020, the CJEU rendered its ruling in Budapest Bank on a request for a preliminary ruling from Hungary’s highest court. The CJEU provides clear guidance on the concept of restriction of competition by object and its practical application by courts and national competition authorities. (...)

11 mars 2020 R

Électricité : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne vient préciser la nature juridique de l’interconnecteur ainsi que le régime applicable à la rente de congestion (Baltic Cable / Energimarknadsinspektionen)

Guillaume Dezobry • N° 2-2020 • pp. 183-185

Filiale de l’énergéticien norvégien Statkraft, la société suédoise Baltic Cable exploite depuis 1994 une interconnexion transfrontalière reliant les réseaux de transport d’électricité allemand et suédois. L’exploitation de cette installation sous-marine de 600 MW, fonctionnant en courant continu, constitue (...)

3 Mar 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice rules on a preliminary ruling request regarding the Hungarian turnover taxes in the telecoms sector (Vodafone / Tesco / Google)

Phedon Nicolaides • March 2020

* Article published on StateAidHub: http://stateaidhub.eu, republished in e-Competitions with the courtesy of the author. The original title of this article appears below the e-Competitions title. Authors are welcome to write an alternative article on this case/text, provided they have no (...)

3 Mar 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the conditions in which a legal person liable to pay a tax can plead its incompatibility with the EU State aid rules before a national court (Vodafone Magyarország Mobil)

Markus Wellinger • March 2020

On 3 March 2020, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice (the “ECJ”) delivered another judgment in the field of taxation and State aid (Vodafone Magyarország Mobil Távközlési Zrt., C-75/18). While this judgment does not substantially develop the case law in this field, it contains useful (...)

14 févr. 2020 R

Communications électroniques : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne interprète la notion de fourniture de réseau de communications électroniques (TV Play Baltic)

Francesco Martucci, Charlotte Ducrocq • N° 1-2020 • pp. 152-153

Saisie d’une question préjudicielle en interprétation, la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne (CJUE) a précisé la notion de fourniture de réseau de communications électroniques par un arrêt en date du 11 décembre 2019. Cette décision s’inscrit dans la lignée de la décision France Télévisions rendue un an (...)

31 Jan 2020 eB

2020 Competition Case Law Digest - A Synthesis of EU, US and National Leading Cases Arbitration and Competition Law: A Mixed-Motive Game?

Christian Bovet

249 Arbitration and Competition Law: A Mixed-Motive Game? C hristi An B oVet (geneva law school) christian.bovet@unige.ch i. introduction since the Mitsubishi judgment, 1 the arbitrability of antitrust cases has become a standard admitted in most–if not all–jurisdictions. 2 A great number of (...)

31 Jan 2020 eB

2020 Competition Case Law Digest - A Synthesis of EU, US and National Leading Cases Amicus Curiae

Georges Vallindas

257 Amicus Curiae: An Overview of EU and National Case Law g eorges V AllindAs Court of justice of the eU (luxembourg) i. introduction Amicus Curiae, an expression whose first known use is dated in the early 17th century, 1 stands for “friend of the court,” that is to say, in general, someone who (...)

30 Jan 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the conditions under which ‘pay-for-delay’ agreements preventing generic versions of a patented medicine from entering the market or delaying such entry may constitute a restriction of competition ‘by object’ or ‘by effect” as well as an abuse of dominant position (Generics)

Amélie Lamarcq, Sandrine Mathieu • January 2020

On 30 January 2020, the Court of Justice of the EU (‘CJEU’) ruled on the applicability of competition law to settlement agreements between a holder of a pharmaceutical patent and manufacturers of generic medicines. In a judgment issued only a week after Advocate General Kokott delivered her (...)

30 janv. 2020 R

Objet anticoncurrentiel : La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne précise, à la suite d’une question préjudicielle du Competition Appeal Tribunal, les conditions dans lesquelles un accord de report d’entrée (“pay-for-delay”) constitue une restriction de concurrence par l’objet (Generics - UK, GlaxoSmithKline, Xellia Pharmaceuticals...)

Michel Debroux • N° 2-2020 • pp. 72-74

Très attendu, l’arrêt rendu le 30 janvier par la quatrième chambre de la Cour en réponse aux questions préjudicielles posées par le Competition Appeal Tribunal [CAT] est déjà vu comme apportant, avec l’arrêt rendu le 2 avril 2020 dans l’affaire C-228/18 (Budapest Bank) une contribution majeure à l’éternel (...)

30 Jan 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the conditions for a pay-for-delay agreement to be qualified as a restriction of competition by object (Generics - UK / GlaxoSmithKline / Actavis / Xellia Pharmaceuticals / Merck / Alpharma)

Donald Slater • January 2020

On 30 January 2020 (case C-307/18), the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") issued a preliminary ruling that sheds more light on the circumstances in which an agreement settling a patent dispute between a pharmaceutical patent holder and a company intending to launch a competing generic product (...)

30 Jan 2020 B

The EU Court of Justice provides guidance on patent settlements between manufacturers of originator and generic medicines (Generics - UK)

Lesley Hannah, Ann-Christin Richter • January 2020

On 30 January 2020, the European Court of Justice released its judgment relating to a patent dispute between the pharmaceutical patent-holder, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), and a generic drug maker concluding that originators and generics are in fact “potential competitors” if the generic drugmaker has (...)

22 Jan 2020 B

The Madrid Commercial Court requests a preliminary ruling to the EU Court of Justice concerning the international competence of the court which was contested by the defendants (RH / AB Volvo)

Vasil Savov, Juraj Siska, Julia Suderow • January 2020

Choice of forum delicti in EU-wide cartel damages cases (C-30/20, RH vs Volvo) Does Art. 7(2) Brussels I bis determine territorial jurisdiction within the EU Member States, Madrid Commercial Court asks EU Court of Justice. The request for a preliminary ruling from the Madrid Commercial Court (...)

19 Dec 2019 B

The EU Court of Justice confirms that a company does not necessarily insulate from State aid if it enjoys exclusive rights and operates in a sector covered by a legal monopoly (Arriva Italia)

Phedon Nicolaides • December 2019

* Article published on StateAidHub: http://stateaidhub.eu, republished in e-Competitions with the courtesy of the author. The original title of this article appears below the e-Competitions title. Authors are welcome to write an alternative article on this case/text, provided they have no (...)

12 Dec 2019 B

The EU Court of Justice rules that a public body indirectly affected by a cartel can claim compensation for losses resulting from an antitrust infringement (Otis)

Martin Favart • December 2019

On 12 December 2019, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) delivered a judgment on a request for a preliminary ruling from the Austrian Supreme Court (C-435/18, Otis and Others v. Land Oberösterreich and Others). The request was made in the context of a compensation claim brought by (...)

12 Dec 2019 B

The EU Court of Justice clarifies the eligibility requirements of claims for indirect damages caused by a violation of Art. 101 TFEU (Otis / Land Oberösterreich)

Darius Maximilian Mosleh • December 2019

The parties Otis GmbH, is an Austria based manufacturer and provider of maintenance services for elevators and escalators. Taken over in 1969, they are now a subsidiary of the American Otis Elevator Company Corp. Schindler (Schindler Liegenschaftsverwaltung GmbH and Schindler Aufzüge und (...)

12 Dec 2019 B

The EU Court of Justice clarifies that a public body granting promotional loans to the purchaser of products covered by a cartel is entitled to claim damages for loss caused by the cartel (Otis / Land Oberösterreich)

Donald Slater, Alexi Dimitriou • December 2019

On 12 December 2019, the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") provided important clarification, holding that Article 101 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a public body which granted promotional loans to purchasers of products covered by a cartel are entitled to claim damages for loss (...)

Votre recherche donne 462 résultats Décision préjudicielle (Art. 267 TFUE)

Debug

Métas associées

total	462
total_found	462
time	0.142