Resale price maintenance

National competition authorities (NCAs), Netherlands, Resale price maintenance, Restriction by object

(Bird & Bird, Netherlands) and (Bird & Bird)/ /Leave a comment

Introduction On 13 November 2023, the District Court of Rotterdam (“Court”) handed down its judgment in the Samsung case. This ruling gives insights on whether a supplier, by actively pursuing its resale price recommendations can be held to restrict competition by object, even if its conduct does not involve any sanctions (or threat thereof) or…

European Court of Justice, Exemptions, National competition authorities (NCAs), National court, Portugal, Price fixing, Resale price maintenance, Restriction by object, Unilateral effects, Vertical agreements

, , (Morais Leitão)/ /1 Comment

Introduction On 29 June 2023, the European Court of Justice (ECJ or Court) issued its judgment in case C-211/22, where it reiterates the legal framework applicable to vertical price fixing agreements under EU competition law. The focus on the need to assess the legal and economic context in which the agreement is celebrated is particularly…

Anticompetitive agreements, China, Resale price maintenance

(Hogan Lovells, China)/ /Leave a comment

On 29 May 2023, China’s antitrust authority – the State Administration for Market Regulation (“SAMR”) – published the decision against Zizhu Pharma on its webpage.  The company was fined by SAMR’s Beijing branch for engaging in resale price maintenance (“RPM”), the antitrust lingo for describing a supplier forcing its distributors to follow minimum resale prices. The Zizhu Pharma decision…

Netherlands, Resale price maintenance, VBER, Vertical agreements, Vertical restraints

(Bird & Bird, Netherlands) and (Bird & Bird)/ /Leave a comment

The Dutch competition authority ACM fined Samsung Electronics Benelux B.V. (“Samsung”) € 39,875,500 for coordinating the retail prices of Samsung television sets together with various retailers. The alleged coordination took place for five years, from January 2013 through December 2018. The ACM only published a summary of the decision dated 14 September 2021 thus far, but…

Bulgaria, Resale price maintenance

(Tsvetkova, Bebov and Partners)/ /Leave a comment

The two recent resale price maintenance (RPM) cases before the Bulgarian Commission for Protection of Competition (CPC or Commission) concern prohibited agreements between the only importers of baby products with brands Medela and Canpol (SMART SM) and Philips Avent (IVENTAS) on one side, and the retailers of baby and mothercare products acting on the Bulgarian…

Australia, Resale price maintenance, Vertical restraints

, (K&L Gates)/ /1 Comment

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has commenced proceedings against cycling wholesaler B & K Holdings (QLD) Pty Ltd, trading as FE Sports (FE Sports), alleging that it engaged in resale price maintenance (RPM). The proceedings are a timely reminder of the risks suppliers face if they restrict resellers’ ability to advertise (in addition…

Resale price maintenance, Turkey

, (ACTECON)/ /Leave a comment

Introduction In May 2019, Turkish Competition Authority (“TCA”) has published two reasoned decisions, namely Bfit Decision[1] and Minikoli Decision[2], in which it assesses the resale price maintenance (“RPM”) activities of the concerned undertakings. These decisions bear significance since they represent the TCA’s unstable approach towards RPM activities. In the aforementioned cases, the TCA adopted an…

India, Resale price maintenance

(Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University)/ /Leave a comment

Introduction The Competition Commission of India (CCI) recently rendered a decision in the matter of Jasper Infotech v. KAFF Appliances[1], wherein it found that KAFF Appliances’ conduct did not cause Resale Price Maintenance (RPM), and thus did not infringe the Competition Act. However, in the course of this decision, the CCI recognized that online marketplaces,…

European Commission, Resale price maintenance

, (Wolf Theiss)/ /Leave a comment

On 24 July 2018, the European Commission (“Commission”) fined, in four separate decisions, consumer electronics manufacturers Asus, Denon & Marantz, Philips and Pioneer for imposing fixed or minimum resale prices on their online retailers. The total fine imposed on the four manufacturers amounts to more than EUR 111 million. The infringements related to a variety of…