Jurisdictions

On July 29, 2024, the Court of Justice issued its preliminary ruling in case C-298/22 Banco BPN v. BIC Português and others.[1]  The Court confirmed that a “standalone” exchange of information between competitors – meaning that the information exchange in question constitutes the examined conduct in itself and is not ancillary to any other conduct – can be deemed a restriction of competition by object under Article 101 TFEU.  This ruling is important because it clarifies that information exchange can constitute a restriction by object, even if it is not linked to a wider anti-competitive practice and no actual market impact has been shown.[2]

In a decision dated July 24, 2024,[1] the Paris Court of Appeals granted a stay of execution in relation to a €2,700,000 fine imposed on the Association Nationale des Industries Alimentaires (“ANIA”) by the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) in the Bisphenol A case only considering the manifestly excessive consequences of such sanction in view of ANIA’s financial situation and without examining its merits.

On July 17, 2024, the General Court dismissed ByteDance Ltd (“ByteDance”)’s appeal against the Commission’s decision designating ByteDance as a “gatekeeper” under the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”).[1]  This marks the first judgment interpreting the DMA’s provisions and clarifying some of its intervention thresholds. The General Court’s ruling follows its earlier rejection of ByteDance’s application for interim measures.[2]

On May 3, 2024, the French Directorate General for Competition Policy, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Control[1] (“DGCCRF”) published its 2023 annual report (the “Report”).[2]  The Report highlights the DGCCRF’s importance in cartel and other anti-competitive behavior detection in France, as well as its new roles, including taking part in the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”).[3]

On 27 May 2024, the German Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) gave the green light for Johnson & Johnson’s (“J&J”) 13.1 billion US dollar acquisition of Shockwave Medical (“Shockwave”).[1]  The decision follows an in-depth investigation into the acquisition’s potential impact on competition and innovation, particularly in the burgeoning field of cardiovascular disease treatment, one of the fastest‑growing global med-tech markets.

On July 4, 2024, the Court of Justice delivered its judgment in the Westfälische Drahtindustrie and Others v. Commission case,[1] addressing Westfälische Drahindustrie GmbH’s (“WDI”) challenge to the Commission’s request for interest payments on the fine imposed on WDI for its participation in a cartel in the prestressing steel sector. This judgment confirms that interest on fines levied by the Commission begins to accrue from the day indicated in the Commission’s decision, even if the EU courts later redetermine the amount of the fine.