On May 14, 2019, the General Court dismissed Recylex’s application for annulment of a Commission decision that imposed a fine on Recylex for its participation in a buyer cartel in the battery recycling sector.[1]
Industries
Commission Opens Investigation Into Data Sharing by Irish Industry Association
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On May 14, 2019, the Commission announced the opening of an investigation into Insurance Ireland, an industry association of Irish insurers that includes Allianz, Hertz, Liberty, AIG, and AXA. Insurance Ireland is suspected of impeding prospective members’ access to its “Insurance Link” data pool.[1]
The Commission Fines Ab Inbev €200 Million for Abusing Its Dominance on the Belgian Beer Market by Restricting Cross-border Sales
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On May 13, 2019, the Commission fined AB InBev €200 million for abusing its dominant position on the Belgian beer market by restricting the ability of Belgian customers to purchase cheaper products from the neighboring Netherlands between February 9, 2009, and October 31, 2016.[1] The Commission’s investigation commenced on June 30, 2016, just a month after it had concluded an in-depth examination of several EU beer markets, including Belgium, in its merger review of AB InBev/SABMiller (“SABMiller Decision”).[2]
FCO Rapporteurs’ Opinions Protected From Access
By Cleary Gottlieb on
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.
FCO Rapporteurs’ Opinions Protected From Access
By Cleary Gottlieb on
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.
Wolseley and Others v Fiat Chrysler and Others
By Cleary Gottlieb on
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
By Cleary Gottlieb on
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
By Cleary Gottlieb on
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
By Cleary Gottlieb on
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
By Cleary Gottlieb on
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.