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.
Industries
Tobii AV v Competition and Markets Authority (February 2020)
On 17 February 2020, the CAT refused Tobii’s application to appeal the CAT’s judgment of 10 January 2020, which upheld…
The Google Shopping Hearing Before The General Court Of The European Union
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]
ICA Publishes Final Report on Big Data Sector Inquiry
On February 10, 2020, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) published its final report in the big data sector inquiry carried out jointly with the Italian Data Protection Authority (the “IDPA”) and the Italian Communications and Media Authority (the “ICMA”).[1]
Munich District Court Dismisses €900 Million Claim Against Truck Cartels
On February 7, 2020, the Munich District Court dismissed financialright claims GmbH’s (“financialright”) claim of approx. €900 million against members of the truck cartel.[1] The judges squashed litigation vehicle financialright’s business model tailored to pursue a U.S. style class action in Germany, ruling that it lacked standing. Upon appeal, the Munich Court of Appeal is called to decide.
FCO Has No Objections to Agricultural Online Trading Platform
On February 5, 2020, the FCO announced that it has no competitive concerns regarding the launch of the agricultural online trading platform operated by unamera GmbH (“Unamera”).[1] The FCO pointed out that while digital platforms can make trading much more efficient, it must be ensured that they must not restrict competition: Digital platforms must not be subject to price-fixing agreements, they must be non-discriminatory and there must not be excessive transparency.
Europcar UK Limited and Others v Mastercard Inc. and Others
On 31 January 2020, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) stayed a claim for damages brought by Europcar against…
Generics UK: The Court of Justice Issues Judgment on the Application of EU Competition Law to Pharmaceutical Reverse-payment Settlements
On Janaury 30, 2020, the European Court of Justice (the “ECJ”) issued a potentially far-reaching preliminary ruling in response to a May 2018 preliminary reference made by the U.K. Competition Appeals Tribunal (the “CAT”).[1]
NBC Universal Completes the Commission’s Investigations Against Vertical Restraints in the Merchandising Sector
On January 30, 2020, the Commission fined NBCUniversal and other companies belonging to the Comcast Corporation €14.3 million for breaching Article 101 TFEU by imposing territorial restrictions on cross-border and online sales of movie merchandising products within the EEA.[1] The Commission granted NBCUniversal a 30% fine reduction on account of its cooperation.
The French Cour de Cassation Annuls the Paris Court of Appeal’s Judgment in the Interbank Fees Case for the Second Time
On January 29, 2020, the Cour de Cassation annulled the judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal in the interbank fees case for interpreting the concept of restriction by object too broadly. The Cour de Cassation noted that only coordination practices that harm competition to a sufficient degree may be qualified as restrictions by object. Absent a clearly established anticompetitive object, likely anticompetitive effects must be proven to establish an infringement of Articles 101(1) TFEU and L. 420-1 of the French Commercial Code.