On May 9, 2019, the German Federal Administrative Court (“FAC”) ruled that access to the preparatory notes (so-called “opinions”) of the rapporteurs of the FCO’s decision divisions under the German Freedom of Information Act is restricted, because public access to the rapporteurs’ opinions would jeopardize the decision divisions’ deliberation process.[1] The FAC thus ultimately confirmed the FCO’s denial of a journalist association’s access request to information on one of the FCO’s merger assessments, including access to the rapporteur’s opinions.
Industries
Wolseley and Others v Fiat Chrysler and Others
This case is one of seven sets of ongoing proceedings against addressees of the July 2016 European Commission decision which fined participants in a truck manufacturing cartel (the so-called “Trucks” cases).
Lucchini Fails to “Free-ride” on Other Cartels Participants’ Successful Appeals
On May 8, 2019, the General Court held that cartel participants that do not appeal a Commission infringement decision cannot seek reimbursement of fines paid where that decision is annulled in proceedings to which they were not a party.[1]
FCO Blocks Heidelberger Druckmaschinen’s Acquisition of MBO Group
On May 7, 2019, after an in-depth investigation, the FCO prohibited Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG’s acquisition of sheet folding machine manufacturer MBO Maschinenbau Oppenweiler Binder GmbH & Co. KG (“MBO Group”).[1] Based on an extensive market investigation, with a particular emphasis on customer feedback, the FCO found that the merger would have created a dominant position for Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG and significantly impeded competition in the market for the manufacture and distribution of sheet folding machines for industrial printing processes.
Media Saturn and Others v Toshiba; Media Saturn and Others v Panasonic
These two linked claims seek to recover damages incurred as a result of alleged anti-competitive conductconcerning the sale of cathode ray tubes (“CRTs”).
Advocate General Tanchey Recommends Dismissing the Commission’s Appeal in Icap
On May 2, 2019, Advocate General Tanchev (“AG Tanchev”) recommended dismissing the Commission’s appeal against the General Court’s ruling in Icap.[1] According to AG Tanchev, the General Court was correct in holding that the Commission’s decision provided insufficient reasoning as regards the determination of the fines imposed on Icap.
CMA’s Use of Director Disqualification Powers Reflects Renewed Focus On Individual Responsibility
In May 2019, the CMA obtained competition disqualification undertakings (“CDUs”) from three individuals for involvement in a cartel relating to…
The TAR Lazio Quashes Two Infringement Decisions by the ICA Regarding an Alleged Parallel Network of Anticompetitive Vertical Agreements Between Radio Taxi Companies and Drivers Active in Rome and Milan
The Commission Accepts Visa and Mastercard Commitments That End Decade-long Antitrust Row About Multi-lateral Interchange Fees
Following the Commission’s market test of Visa’s and Mastercard’s commitments offered on April 29, 2019, as reported in our December 2018 newsletter, the Commission accepted the companies’ commitments to cap their inter-regional multi-lateral interchange fees (“MIFs”).[1] The commitments put an end to the first publically reported probe into inter-regional MIFs by any antitrust authority worldwide, which was opened by the Commission in 2013.
Strident Publishing Limited v Creative Scotland
On 17 April 2020, the CAT handed down its preliminary issue judgment on whether the defendant, Creative Scotland, constitutes an undertaking for the purposes of the Competition Act 1998. The issue arose in a claim by Strident Publishing Limited, a small independent book publisher, for an alleged abuse of dominance by Creative Scotland in breach of the Chapter 2 prohibition, by providing “investment finance” to publishers of literary works.