On January 20, 2021, the Commission imposed fines totaling €7.8 million on Valve, the owner of the video gaming platform Steam, and five PC video game publishers[1] for breaching Article 101 TFEU. The Commission found that the companies prevented gamers from activating certain PC video games purchased from sellers in eight Central and Eastern European Member States, where prices are generally lower than in other Member States (so-called “geo-blocking”).[2] This decision is a reminder of the Commission’s strict stance on cross-border sales restrictions.
Industries
FCO Safeguards Competition in Mobile Communication Cooperation
On January 19, 2021, the FCO announced that it would closely monitor cooperation agreements between Deutsche Telekom, Vodafone, and Telefónica…
UKRS Training Limited v NSAR
On 15 January 2021, the CAT published an order consenting to UKRS Training Limited (UKRS) withdrawing its action against NSAR Limited (NSAR) alleging a breach of the Chapter 2 prohibition.
The Nuremberg-Fürth Regional Court Dismisses a Damages Action Against the Immunity Recipient in the Confectionary Cartel
On January 14, 2021, the Nuremberg-Fürth Regional Court dismissed an action for damages against a confectionery manufacturer, which participated in an information exchange in the so-called “Four Party” discussion group.[1]
The Court of Justice: Bid-rigging Cartels End With the Signing of the Tender Contract
On January 14, 2021, the Court of Justice held that a bid-rigging infringement[1] ends when the essential characteristics of the tender contract, in particular the amount to be paid for the works that are the subject of the tender contract, have been definitively agreed.[2] This is the moment when the successful bidder and the contracting authority conclude the tender contract, regardless of whether the payment instalments are made, or the works are completed, after this date.
The Commission Approves London Stock Exchange’s Acquisiton of Refinitiv, Subbject to Access Remedies: A (Likely) First in the Industry
On January 13, 2021, the Commission conditionally approved the acquisition by the London Stock Exchange Group (“LSEG”) of Refinitiv, following an in-depth Phase II investigation.[1] The decision likely marks the first-ever access commitment in a merger decision approved by the Commission in the financial sector.[2]
FP McCann Limited v Competition and Markets Authority
On 13 January 2021, the CAT published an order confirming FP McCann Limited (FPM) had infringed the Chapter 1 Prohibition by engaging in a price-fixing and market sharing cartel. As a result, the first condition required for a competition directors disqualification order (CDO) against two of FPM’s directors, Eoin McCann and Francis McCann, was satisfied.
FCJ Confirms: German Merger Control Test Differs From European Test
On January 12, 2021, the FCJ dismissed CTS Eventim’s appeal against a decision of the DCA [1], thus confirming the FCO prohibition of CTS Eventim’s acquisition of Four Artists.[2] In its landmark decision, the FCJ clarified that under German merger control law, any strengthening of a dominant position, even if it is not appreciable, can constitute a significant impediment to effective competition (“SIEC”) and serve as grounds for prohibiting a transaction.
The Commission’s Initiative on Shielding Collective Bargaining From Antitrust Scrutiny
On January 6, 2021, the Commission published an inception impact assessment[1] on its latest policy initiative: allowing for more collective bargaining under EU antitrust rules to improve working conditions for self-employed individuals, in particular in relation to digital platform workers (e.g., food delivery services).
The Court of Milan Rejects a Request for an Expert’s Preliminary Assessment of Damages Based on the 2017 Google Search (Shopping) Decision of the European Commission
On January 4, 2021, the Tribunale di Milano (the “Court of Milan”) rejected a request for an expert’s preliminary assessment of damages in a civil action brought by 7 Pixel s.r.l. (“7 Pixel”) against Google LLC (“Google”, together with 7 Pixel, the “Parties”).[1] The Court of Milan rejected Pixel’s attempt to use a swift settlement-like procedure on the basis of Article 696-bis of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, which allows the judge to order an expert’s report providing an upfront assessment of the damages.