On October 8, 2019, the German Federal Court of Justice (“FCJ”) partially quashed a 2017 decision of the Munich Court of Appeal,[1] finding that ad-blocking software provider eyeo GmbH (“Eyeo”) may have abused a dominant position.[2] The FCJ referred the case back to the Court of Appeal.
The ICA Fines the Italian Federation of Equestrian Sports for Non-Compliance With Commitments and Alleged Abuse of Dominance
On October 8, 2019, the ICA found that the Italian Federation of Equestrian Sports (“FISE”) had (i) breached the commitments it offered in 2011, and (ii) abused its dominant position in the market for the organization of events and horse races having a professional, amateur or recreational nature, with a view to restricting the activities of amateur operators (or sports promotion bodies).[1]
CMA v Flynn Pharma Ltd and Others
On 4 October 2019, the Court of Appeal granted the CMA permission to amend its grounds of appeal in a landmark case concerning excessive pricing in the supply of phenytoin sodium capsules, a medicine used to control epileptic seizures.
New Guidelines on the Control of Abusive Behavior in the Electricity Generation and Wholesale Trade Sector
On September 27, 2019, the FCO and the Federal Network Agency (“FNA”) jointly published guidelines on the control of the abuse of a dominant position in relation to electricity generation and wholesale trade (“Guidelines”).[1]
Copyright: The Tar Lazio Upholds an ICA Decision Against Società Italiana Degli Autori Ed Editori for Abuse of Dominance
On September 26, 2019, the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio (the “TAR Lazio”) rejected the appeal submitted by Società Italiana degli Autori ed Editori (“SIAE”) – the Italian copyright collecting society – against the 2018 decision by which the ICA imposed on the said undertaking a symbolic fine of €1,000 for abusing its dominant position in the market for the provision of copyright management services, in violation of Article 102 TFEU.[1]
General Court Upholds Poland’s Challenge To OPAL Pipeline Decision
On September 10, 2019, the General Court annulled a European Commission decision concerning the Ostseepipeline-Anbindungsleitung (“OPAL”) gas pipeline for breaching the principle of energy solidarity. The decision approved raising a cap on Gazprom’s use of the pipeline.
Amazon Fined €4 Million for Restrictive Trade Practices
On September 2, 2019, the Paris Commercial Court sanctioned Amazon for having imposed unfair conditions on businesses selling on its platform. Amazon received a record fine of €4 million and was ordered to remove or modify the contentious clauses from its contracts and terms of use within six months, failing which it will incur a periodic penalty of €10,000 for each day’s delay.
Two Cycling Groups Call For Antitrust Probe Into Governing Body For Sports Cycling
In September 2019, cycling organizations Velon and the Italian Cycling League filed separate complaints with the Commission, alleging that the world governing body for sports cycling, Union Cycliste Internationale (“UCI”), breached EU competition law in its dual role of regulating and organizing cycling events.[1]
DCA Picks Apart FCO’s Facebook Decision in Interim Proceedings
On August 26, 2019, the Düsseldorf Court of Appeal (“DCA”), in an interim decision, suspended the German Federal Competition Office’s (“FCO”) prohibition decision against Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”), expressing “serious doubts” about its legal basis.[1] This decision marks not only the second major setback for the FCO after the DCA’s annulment of the FCO’s Booking.com decision on price parity clauses earlier this year.[2] It might also constitute a major setback for the FCO’s efforts to act as a leading enforcer of competition law in the digital economy.
The Polynesian Competition Authority Fines a Company for Excessive Prices for the First Time
On August 22, 2019, the Polynesian Competition Authority (PCA) imposed a fine of 235 million CFP francs (about 2 million euros) on the retail division of the Wane group for having imposed excessively high prices for the refrigeration of its suppliers’ beverages.[1] This is the first abuse of dominance decision and, more generally, the first contentious ruling by the PCA since its creation in 2016.