If the recent Wahl opinion could have instilled some doubts about the responsibility of cartel facilitators under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),[1]Advocate General Wahl Opinion, AC Treuhand v Commission, ECLI:EU:C:2015:350 the debate has been brought to an end with the Court of Justice of the European Union’s…
This blog deals with the 2nd part of the FCO’s discussion paper on internet platforms: possible theories of harm and intervention of competition agencies. For the first part on general concepts please see my previous blog. Merger control The FCO explains that reducing the number of platforms may actually increase competition, due to the easier…
The first Post Danmark case in 2012[1]Case C-209/10, available here: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=121061&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=148291 brought about a modest antitrust revolution on Article 102 applicable to discrimination. Rarefied economic concepts were confirmed. Price discrimination as a standalone abuse was all but confined to a historical footnote in antitrust textbooks, to be replaced by a predation type test. Article 102…
On 6 October 2015, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in a case concerning rebates and when they fall foul of EU competition law. Background The case concerns Post Danmark and, unlike appeals against European Commission Decisions, came by way of a reference from the Danish High Court seeking formal guidance on the interpretation…
Co-authored by Patrick Harrison and Lara Kaplan, Sidley Austin LLP. The European Commission (“Commission”) introduced its settlement procedure for cartel cases back in 2008.[1]Commission Regulation (EC) No 662/2008 of 30 June 2008 amending Regulation No 773/2004, as regards the conduct of settlement procedures in cartel cases (OJ 2008 L171) (“the Settlements Notice”). The main aims? …
What and when? The Commission has adopted amendments to a number of its key procedural rules in order to bring them into line with the EU Directive on Damages Actions, which was adopted in 2014 and must be incorporated into the national law of EU Member States by 27 December 2016. The amendments focus on…
Standards lie at the heart of the digital economy – without standards, we would not have smartphones, tablets and other key parts of modern life. Europe’s highest court recently delivered a judgment in Huawei v. ZTE[1]Judgment of the Court of Justice of 16 July 2015 in Case C‑170/13, Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd v. ZTE Corp….
It is never a good sign when an advocate general’s opinion warns the European Court of Justice (ECJ) not to be swayed by “ephemeral trends” or the “Zeitgeist” of economic analysis, but instead to stick to the “legal foundations on which the prohibition of abuse of a dominant position rests in EU law”. Advocate General…
On 9 July 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“ECJ”) issued an important judgment[1]Case C-231/14P – InnoLux v European Commission, judgment of 9 July 2015. concerning the basis on which cartel fines by the European Commission should be calculated for vertically integrated companies. The judgment endorses the power of the European Commission…
The Court of Justice of the European Union has now delivered its judgment in the Deutsche Bahn[1]Case C-583/13P – Deutsche Bahn and others v European Commission, judgment of 18 June 2015. case. This case concerns important practical principles which govern the conduct of European Commission dawn raids (on-the-spot surprise inspections used to investigate possible infringements…
