On December 2, 2020, the Regional Court of Bonn dismissed BayWa AG’s (“BayWa”) action for state liability against the Republic of Germany and the FCO for a breach of the constitutional prohibition of discrimination in the context of the FCO’s leniency program.[1]
JD Sports Fashion plc v Competition and Markets Authority
On 1 September 2020, JD Sports Fashion and Pentland Group Limited filed an appeal against a CMA decision of 29 July 2020 to impose a penalty of £300,000 on the parties for failing to comply with the requirements of the CMA’s initial enforcement order issued in the context of the completed acquisition by JD Sports of Footasylum plc.
AB Volvo (Publ) v Ryder Ltd
On 11 November 2020, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment clarifying the ability of parties that settle European Commission (Commission) antitrust investigations to challenge the Commission’s findings in follow-on-damage actions. The judgment concerns an appeal relating to a preliminary issue arising in seven claims for damages following on from the 2016 Commission Trucks settlement decision (the Settlement Decision). The Court of Appeal held that the five truck manufacturers could not deny facts they had admitted in settling with the Commission – facts that were subsequently recorded in the Settlement Decision.
National Grid Electricity Transmission plc v ABB Ltd and Others (Power Cables Cartels)
On 21 October 2020, the National Grid Electricity Transmission plc (NGET) withdrew its claim against ABB following settlement.
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.
FCJ Strikes Down Passing-on Defense When Damages Are Spread Across Many Consumers
On September 23, 2020, the FCJ overturned a judgement by the DCA in which the Essen Transportation Authority brought a follow-on damages action against members of the so-called Rail Cartel (“Schienenkartell”).[1] It referred the case back to the DCA and provided further guidance to the DCA in relation to the applicable burden of proof as well as the scope of the passing-on defense.
FCJ Clarifies Scope of Binding Effect of Cartels Settlement Decisions and Confirms Existence of Presumption of Damages
On September 23, 2020, the FCJ handed down its much anticipated first judgment in relation to damages claims resulting from the trucks cartel and provided helpful clarifications on some key questions regarding cartel follow-on damages actions.[1]
National Grid Electricity Transmission plc v ABB Ltd and Others
On 24 August 2020, Safran SA, a French technology group, entered into a deed of settlement with National Grid Electricity
SP Power Systems Limited and others v Prysmian S.p.A and others
On 30 July 2020, the CAT published a consent order by which it stayed a damages claim brought by SP
Commission Adopts Guidance for National Courts When Handling Disclosure of Confidential Information in Private Cartels Follow-on Damages Litigation
Following a public consultation launched in July 2019,[1] the Commission adopted a guidance document[2] on the protection of confidential information in proceedings for the private enforcement of EU competition law based on the Antitrust Damages Directive (“ADD”).[3] The Confidentiality Guidance is intended for use by national courts to ensure consistency across Member States regarding access to and the protection of confidential information disclosed in private enforcement proceedings. The Communication is not binding and does not modify the rules applicable in different Member States, but rather outlines a number of measures and tools national courts may employ to help protect confidential information.