On October 5, 2020, the General Court partially annulled three European Commission decisions ordering French supermarket groups Casino and Intermarché to submit to unannounced inspections.1[1]The General Court found that the Commission did not have sufficiently strong evidence to suspect one of the alleged infringements and had therefore breached the dawn raided companies’ right to the inviolability of the home.
Dortmund Regional Court on Cartels Follow-on Damage Claim Quantification
On September 30, 2020, the Dortmund Regional Court issued a ruling in a follow-on damages action related to the so-called Rail Cartel (“Schienenkartell”).[1] It is one of the still very few cartel follow-on damages cases in which a German court awarded damages.
The Council of State Declares Inadmissible an Application for Revocation of a Previous Judgment on Grounds of Error of Fact
On September 28, 2020, the Council of State[1] dismissed the appeal brought by Buzzi Unicem S.p.A. (“Buzzi”) for the revocation of a judgment previously delivered by the same court, which upheld the lower court’s ruling as well as an ICA decision fining an alleged cartel in the cement sector.[2] Buzzi challenged the judgment before the Council of State on grounds of error of fact.[3]
The Court of Justice Rejects Prysmian’s Appeal in Line With Its Prior Judgments on the Power Cables Cartels
On September 24, 2020, the Court of Justice dismissed an appeal brought by the Italian cable producer Prysmian against a €104.6 million fine imposed by the Commission for its participation in the Power Cables cartel.[1]
ICA Fines Radio Taxi Companies for an Anticompetitive Agreement in the Market for the Collection and Sorting of Orders for Taxi Services in Naples
On September 15, 2020, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) imposed fines on Consortaxi, Taxi Napoli, Radio Taxi Partenope and Desa Radiotaxi (collectively, the “Radio Taxi Companies”) for entering into an anticompetitive agreement in the market for the collection and sorting of orders for taxi services in Naples, in violation of Article 101 of the TFEU (the “Decision”).[1] The Decision was taken after a series of other ICA decisions aimed at investigating and preventing anticompetitive practices of radio taxi companies foreclosing the entry of competing platforms in the market for the collection and sorting of orders for taxi services in other municipalities in Italy.[2]
Lexon (UK) Limited v Competition and Markets Authority
On 27 August 2020, the CMA applied for a director disqualification order against Mr. Pritesh Sonpal in connection with its decision to fine the company of which he is a director, Lexon, for exchanging commercially sensitive information about Nortriptyline Tablets with two other companies.
The Council of State Upholds an ICA Decision Refusing To Review the Amount of a Fine
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v Barclays Bank and others
On 27 July 2020, the High Court dismissed an application by UBS AG to strike out or obtain summary judgment in relation to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC-R) claims alleging that UBS AG and other banks had colluded to manipulate the United States Dollar London Interbank Offered Rate (USD LIBOR) benchmark in breach of the Chapter 1 Prohibition and Article 101 TFEU. FDIC-R brought an action on 10 March 2017, more than six years after the conduct at issue.
The TAR Lazio Quashes an ICA Decision Fining Alleged Bid-rigging Practices in Integrated Health and Safety Management
On July 27, 2020, the TAR Lazio annulled an ICA decision of September 2019, which fined Com Metodi S.p.A. (“Com Metodi”), Sintesi S.p.A. (“Sintesi”), and Igeam S.r.l., Igeamed S.r.l. and Igeam Academy S.r.l. (jointly, “Igeam”) (together, the “Companies”) for participating in an alleged cartel which affected the outcome of the open tender procedure for the provision of integrated health and safety management services in the workplaces at Italian Public Administrations, launched by Consip S.p.A. (“Consip”) in December 2015 (the “SIC 4 Tender”).[1]
The TAR Lazio Annuls the 2019 ICA Decision Concerning an Alleged Bid-rigging Cartels in Facility Maintenance Services
On July 27, 2020, the TAR Lazio delivered 15 judgments concerning the 2019 ICA decision, by which 19 companies were found liable for participating in a cartel aimed at rigging a tender procedure in the facility maintenance sector in Italy (the “Decision”).[1]
The TAR Lazio delivered two sets of rulings: on the one hand, it quashed the Decision with respect to three of the addressee companies;[2] on the other hand, with respect to the 12 other applicants, it upheld the finding of infringement, but ordered the ICA to re-determine the fines originally imposed on them.[3]