France

On September 2, 2021,[1] the Paris Court of Appeals annulled in its entirety a decision issued by the FCA in April 2020, which fined betting operator Pari Mutuel Urbain (“PMU”) for non-compliance with unbundling commitments that had been made mandatory in 2014[2]. The Court held that, contrary to the FCA’s findings, PMU had been consistently complying with its commitments. The 900 million euros fine imposed on PMU was consequently annulled.

On July 30, 2021, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) published its revised Fining Guidelines, which repealed and replaced the 2011 guidelines.[1] In June, the FCA had opened a public consultation on a draft, which provided for different changes of the method of calculation of fines. While the Guidelines as published have retained those changes, they also include several more minor ones resulting from the public consultation.

On July 12, 2021,[1] the French Competition Authority (the “FCA”) imposed a €500 million fine on Google for having allegedly not complied with four of the seven injunctions imposed on the company in its April 2020 interim measures’ decision.[2] This is the highest fine ever imposed by the FCA for non-compliance with injunctions. The investigation on the merits is still ongoing.

In a July 7, 2021 ruling, the Cour de cassation dismissed the appeal of the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) in the Sanicorse case, confirming the Paris Court of Appeals’ holding on excessive prices and, more generally, unfair terms (also called “exploitative abuses”).[1] This is a major setback for the FCA, which intended to use the legal reasoning developed in the Sanicorse decision in other (pricing or non-pricing) unfair terms cases.

On June 24, 2021,[1] the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) issued a decision closing ten years of investigation for alleged retail price maintenance (“RPM”) practices by Kärcher and dismissed the case. This is one of the rare instances where the Collège has dismissed a case for lack of evidence after objections were notified to the party.

On June 11, 2021, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) published a draft to update its Notice on fines.[1] The draft is subject to a public consultation which was held between June 11 and 25, 2021. According to the FCA, the update was prompted by the entry into force of ordinance No.2021-649 of May 26, 2021, which implements Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council of December 11, 2018 (“ECN+ Directive”), whose aim is to strengthen and harmonize competition enforcement by national authorities.

On June 9, 2021, the French Cour de cassation (“Cour de cassation”) put an end to a legal saga involving the French legacy train operator SNCF’s anticompetitive practices in the railway freight sector.[1] The Cour de cassation confirmed the Paris Court of Appeals’ December 20, 2018 ruling[2] that had found that the SNCF had breached Articles L. 420-2 of the French Commercial Code and 102 TFEU by applying a predatory pricing strategy to prevent rivals from entering into key contracts in the market for transport of full-train-load.

On June 7, 2021, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) imposed a fine of €220 million on Google Inc. (now Google LLC), Alphabet Inc., and all Alphabet Inc.’s subsidiaries (together, “Google”), for allegedly abusing its dominant position in the market for advertising servers for website and mobile application publishers.[1]

On June 3, 2021, the French Competition Authority (the “FCA”) launched a public consultation to assess the adequacy of the commitments (the “Commitments”) offered by Facebook Inc., Facebook Ireland Ltd, and Facebook France (together, “Facebook”) as part of the FCA’s investigation into allegedly abusive online advertising practices by Facebook.

In an order dated May 12, 2021, the Paris Court of Appeals ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to rule on Roche’s request for injunctive relief against the French Competition Authority (“FCA”), who had shared videos related to the case on social media and sent a letter to a pharmaceutical trade association in the aftermath of the publication of its prohibition  decision.[1].