On May 8, 2019, the General Court held that cartel participants that do not appeal a Commission infringement decision cannot seek reimbursement of fines paid where that decision is annulled in proceedings to which they were not a party.[1]
Advocate General Tanchey Recommends Dismissing the Commission’s Appeal in Icap
On May 2, 2019, Advocate General Tanchev (“AG Tanchev”) recommended dismissing the Commission’s appeal against the General Court’s ruling in Icap.[1] According to AG Tanchev, the General Court was correct in holding that the Commission’s decision provided insufficient reasoning as regards the determination of the fines imposed on Icap.
CMA’s Use of Director Disqualification Powers Reflects Renewed Focus On Individual Responsibility
In May 2019, the CMA obtained competition disqualification undertakings (“CDUs”) from three individuals for involvement in a cartel relating to
The French Competition Authority Considers for the First Time an Overall Market for the Online and Offline Distribution of Toys
The French Competition Authority (the “FCA”) considered online and offline sales of toys as forming part of the same market in the context of its investigation of the merger of toy companies Luderix International and Jellej Jouets. The FCA thus relied once more on the methodology it applied in its Fnac/Darty merger clearance decision, when it concluded to the existence of a single market including both physical and online retail channels for the distribution of consumer electronics.
FCO Concludes Sector Inquiry Into Comparison Websites
On April 11, 2019, the Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) published its final report on its sector inquiry into comparison websites.[1] This inquiry marked the first time that the FCO had analyzed a sector on the basis of its consumer protection competencies that have only recently been created. It clearly emphasized the agency’s ambition to expand its enforcement authority also into this area. Overall, the FCO came to the conclusion that several comparison portals infringed consumer rights in particular by providing misleading or incomplete information to consumers.
The General Court Dismisses Qualcomm’s Challenge of a Commission Request for Information
On April 9, 2019, the General Court dismissed Qualcomm’s application for annulment of a Commission decision of March 31, 2017, requiring Qualcomm to provide information in the context of an antitrust probe.
The Commission Fines General Electric €52 Million For Providing Incorrect Information During Merger Review
On April 8, 2019, the Commission fined General Electric (“GE”) €52 million for providing incorrect information during its 2017 investigation of GE’s acquisition of Danish wind turbine blade manufacturer LM Wind Power Holdings A/S (“LM Wind”).
The Court of Justice Clarifies the Prohibition of Double Jeopardy in Competition Law Cases
On April 3, 2019, the Court of Justice ruled that a national competition authority can in a single decision fine a company for infringing both EU and national competition law, without infringing the principle of ne bis in idem (double jeopardy).[1]
The General Court Rejects Application to Block Disclosure of Cartels Settlement Submissions To Interested Third Parties Following Ethanol Benchmark Case
Enforcement by Numbers
As the charts below show, enforcement by concurrent competition agencies has increased substantially since the ERRA came into force.[1]