Industries

On February 26, 2020, the Court of Rome issued a non-final judgment in an action for damages brought by Siportal S.r.l. (“Siportal”) against Telecom Italia S.p.A. (“TIM”) in follow-on litigation for an alleged abuse of dominance in the provision of wholesale access services,[1] which had been found and fined by ICA in 2013. The Court rejected TIM’s claim that the limitation period had expired, found that TIM had committed an abuse against Siportal, and asked the ICA to assist the Court with respect to the determination of the quantum of damages pursuant to Article 14(3) of Legislative Decree No. 3/2017.[2]

On February 25, 2020, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) imposed on Telecom Italia

S.p.A. (“TIM”) a fine of approx. € 116.1 million for abusing the dominant position it held both in the national market for wholesale access services to, and in the national market for retail telecommunications services on, the broadband (“BB”) and ultra-broadband (“UBB”) fixed network, in violation of Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (the “TFEU”).[1]

On February 21, 2020, the Commission fined hotel group Meliá €6.7 million for restricting cross-border sales through the terms of its hotel accommodation agreements with tour operators.[1] These terms allegedly forced tour operators to discriminate between EEA customers based on their country of residence. The Meliá decision is noteworthy for two reasons. It reiterates the Commission’s strict stance on any measures partitioning the EU Single Market, a theory of harm the Commission has applied frequently in recent years. It also continues the Commission’s now frequent practice of rewarding cooperation in non-cartel cases.

On February 20, 2020, the Paris Commercial Court dismissed the damages claim brought by various entities of Belgian retail group Louis Delhaize following the French Competition Authority’s 2015 sanction decision in the Dairy Products case.6[1]The Court considered that the claimants’ economic assessment of their harm was insufficiently substantiated, whereas the defendants were able to successfully raise the passing-on defense.

On February 19, 2020, the Commission unveiled its strategy to “shape Europe’s digital future.”[1] This strategy identifies three key objectives: invest in technology that works for people (which includes investment in connectivity, discussions over a framework for AI, cybersecurity, and data literacy), develop a fair and competitive economy (which focuses on the creation of a single market for data and the use of competition law policies to level the playing field), and create an open, democratic, and sustainable society.

On February 19, 2020, the FCA expressed its views on the possible lines of approach to enhance antitrust enforcement in the digital sector, both at the EU and national levels. This publication covers questions relating to anticompetitive practices and merger control, and shows the FCA’s willingness to be part of the on-going thinking process launched by the European Commission and many competition authorities and regulators around the world in order to deal swiftly with questions raised by the growth of digital platforms. The FCA will endeavor to update its contribution in light of legislative proposals that could be formulated in the coming months and the reactions that the publication might trigger.

In a three-day session culminating on St Valentine’s day, the General Court of the European Union (the “General Court”) heard Google LLC’s (“Google”) and the European Commission’s (the “Commission”) arguments in the Google Shopping case.[1] In 2017, the Commission adopted a decision (the “Decision”) fining Google a record-breaking €2.42 billion for abuse of dominance by positioning and displaying its own comparison shopping service (“CSS”),[2] Google Shopping, more favorably in its general search result pages compared to rival CSSs.[3]