Italy

On April 27, 2021, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) imposed a fine of €102 million on Alphabet Inc., Google LLC and Google Italy S.r.l. (together, “Google”) for an alleged refusal to allow an electric vehicle (“EV”) charging app developed by Enel X (named “JuicePass”) to be published on Google’s Android Auto platform.[1]

On April 27, 2021, the ICA imposed a fine on Società Cooperativa Taxi Torino, a cooperative of taxi operators (hereinafter “Taxi Torino”), for abusing its dominant position in the market for the collection and sorting of taxi orders in the municipality of Turin (the “Decision”).[1] In particular, following a complaint submitted by a company that manages a mobile app connecting taxi drivers and consumers (Mytaxi Italia S.r.l.; “Mytaxi”), the ICA’s investigation focused on some clauses in Taxi Torino’s by-laws, which imposed a non-compete obligation on taxi drivers participating in Taxi Torino’s network and had the effect of foreclosing the market, also in light of Taxi Torino’s dominant position and the lack of actual competition.

On April 13, 2021, the Rome Court of Appeal rejected the appeal brought by Telecom Italia S.p.A. (“TIM”) against a judgment of the Court of Rome in a follow-on action for damages.[1] The Court of Rome had ordered TIM to pay COMM 3000 S.p.A. (formerly KPNQwest S.p.A., “COMM 3000”) approximately €8 million in damages for alleged abuse of dominant position in the market for the provision of wholesale access services. The ICA had imposed a fine for the alleged abuse in 2013.[2]

On March 30, 2021, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) closed an investigation against three equipment manufacturers in the market for maintenance of high-tech diagnostic imaging devices, without finding any abuse of dominant position. The ICA found that the evidence collected during the investigation did not allow to confirm the allegations put forward at the beginning of the investigation.[1]

On March 15, 2021, the Council of State delivered a non-final judgment (the “New Judgment”) dismissing in part, on procedural grounds, the applications brought by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. and Roche S.p.A. (“Roche”), as well as Novartis Farma S.p.A. and Novartis AG (“Novartis”; jointly, the “Parties”), for the revocation of a 2019 judgment of the same court (the “2019 Judgment”).[1] By the 2019 Judgment, the Council of State upheld the ruling of the Lazio Regional Administrative Court (the “TAR Lazio”) as well as the 2014 ICA decision fining the Parties for their participation in an alleged cartel (as described below; the “ICA Decision”).[2]

On February 23, 2021, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) made legally binding the commitments offered by Italgas Reti S.p.A. (“Italgas”), a company active in the gas distribution sector in the province of Venice, which belongs to the Italgas group (the “Decision”).[1] Italgas’ commitments were found to address adequately the ICA’s concerns that the company may have abused its dominant position in the local market for the provision of natural gas distribution services, in violation of Article 102 TFEU. According to the ICA’s decision to open the investigation, Italgas’ conduct was allegedly aimed at delaying the launch in 2018 of an open tender procedure for the provision of gas distribution services in a number of municipalities in the province of Venice (the “Tender”).

In a judgment issued on February 2, 2021,[1] the Council of State confirmed that Rete Ferroviaria Italiana S.p.A. (the Italian railway network manager, “RFI”) and Trenitalia S.p.A. (an Italian railway transport operator, “Trenitalia”) abused market dominance by engaging in dilatory tactics in the context of proceedings with the competent authorities, thus hindering access of a new entrant, Arenaways S.p.A. (“Arenaways”), to the railway passenger transport sector.

In a judgment issued on February 2, 2021,[1] the Council of State confirmed that Rete Ferroviaria Italiana S.p.A. (the Italian railway network manager, “RFI”) and Trenitalia S.p.A. (an Italian railway transport operator, “Trenitalia”) abused market dominance by engaging in dilatory tactics in the context of proceedings with the competent authorities, thus hindering access of a new entrant, Arenaways S.p.A. (“Arenaways”), to the railway passenger transport sector.

On January 4, 2021, the Tribunale di Milano (the “Court of Milan”) rejected a request for an expert’s preliminary assessment of damages in a civil action brought by 7 Pixel s.r.l. (“7 Pixel”) against Google LLC (“Google”, together with 7 Pixel, the “Parties”).[1] The Court of Milan rejected Pixel’s attempt to use a swift settlement-like procedure on the basis of Article 696-bis of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, which allows the judge to order an expert’s report providing an upfront assessment of the damages.

In four judgments issued on December 28 to 30, 2020,[1] the Council of State upheld four rulings of the Lazio Regional Administrative Court (“TAR Lazio”),[2] which had set aside an infringement decision issued by the Italian Competition Authority (“ICA”) against the Italian top tier football league (Lega Nazionale Professionisti Serie A, “Lega”), its advisor Infront Italy S.r.l. (“Infront”), and TV broadcasters Sky Italia S.r.l. (“SKY”), Reti Televisive Italiane S.p.A. and its subsidiary Mediaset Premium S.p.A. (jointly, “Mediaset”; together with Lega, Infront and Sky, the “Parties”), regarding an alleged anticompetitive agreement to alter the award of TV broadcasting rights for Lega’s 2015-2018 seasons (the “ICA Decision”).[3] The Council of State confirmed that the ICA failed to prove that broadcasters colluded with Lega and Infront over the assignment of broadcasting rights.