The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant economic disruption, including supply shortages, cost increases, and liquidity constraints resulting from a prolonged shutdown. As EU Member States and businesses respond to these challenges, and even as lockdown measures are gradually eased, their actions continue to raise potential issues under competition law.
The Italian Supreme Court Rules on Limitation Periods and Evidentiary Value of Commitment Decisions in Follow-on Actions
On February 27, 2020, the Italian Supreme Court fully upheld a judgment of the Milan Court of Appeals, which had dismissed the damages claim of Uno Communications S.p.A. (“UNO”) against Vodafone Italia S.p.A. (“Vodafone”).[1]
The Court of Rome Asks for ICA’s Assistance With Quantification of Damages in Follow-on Case
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]
Granville Technology Group Limited and Others v Infineon Technologies AG and Others (DRAM Cartels)
On 25 February 2020, the High Court handed down its judgment in a preliminary issue relating to limitation in a
Fiber Roll-out and Abuse of Rights: ICA Fines Tim Over €100 Million for Abusing Its Dominant Position in the Wholesale and Retail Markets for BB and Ultra-BB Telecommunications Services in Italy
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]
The Commission Unveils New Positions on Data and AI as Part of Its Digital Strategy
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.
The French Competition Authority Publishes Its Contribution to the Debate on Competition Policy in the Digital Sector
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.
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]