On July 30, 2019, the Milan Court of Appeal (the “Court of Appeal”) fully upheld a ruling of the Milan Court finding that Società per Azioni Servizi Aeroportuali (“SEA”) and Aeroporti di Roma (“ADR”) had put in place several anticompetitive practices in violation of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU.[1]
The Court of Justice in Tibor-trans Expands Forum Options for Cartels Damages Claimants
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On July 29, 2019, the Court of Justice confirmed that the Hungarian courts had jurisdiction to rule on damages claims brought by Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. (“Tibor-Trans”), a Hungarian logistics company, against DAF Trucks N.V. (“DAF”), one of the members of the EU-wide trucks cartel.[1] The Court of Justice clarified that cartel victims may claim damages in any Member State affected by a cartel, even where they had no direct contractual relationship with the cartelists.
Monopolies Commission Calls for Higher Quality Train Services and More Competition in the Railway Sector
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On July 25, 2019, the German Monopolies Commission presented its 7th Sector Report on the German Railway market, assessing quality and competition in the industry.[1]
Merricks v Mastercard
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On 25 July 2019, the Supreme Court granted Mastercard permission to appeal the Court of Appeal’s judgment of April 2019.…
ICA Finds Milan Notarial Board Liable for Anticompetitive Conduct but Does Not Issue a Fine
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On July 24, 2019, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) issued a decision[1] (the “Decision”) finding that the Milan Notarial Board had violated Article 2 of Law No. 287/90 (the “MNB”). According to the ICA, the MNB allegedly collected disaggregated data on the performance of notaries in the Milan district in order to monitor their economic activity and discourage aggressive competition. However, the anticompetitive use of the data stopped when the ICA started the proceedings and, thus, the cartel did not have any anticompetitive effect. As a consequence, the ICA did not impose a fine.
Credit Suisse v HRMC
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On 19 July 2019, the High Court dismissed an action for damages brought by Credit Suisse and others against HM…
Achilles Information v Network Rail
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On 19 July 2019, the CAT ruled that Network Rail illegally enforced its ‘RISQS-only’ rule on other users of its…
Commission Fines Qualcomm €242 Million In Its First Predatory Pricing Decision In Almost Two Decades
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On July 18, 2019, the Commission fined Qualcomm €242 million for abusing its dominance in the global market for broadband chipsets by selling below cost to “strategically important” customers, to force a competitor out of the market.[1] This is the first time in 16 years that the Commission has fined a company for predatory pricing after the Wanadoo decision of 2003.[2]
Vodafone Grants Telefonica Cable Access in Germany To Secure Clearance of Liberty Global Acquisitions
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On July 18, 2019, the Commission conditionally approved Vodafone’s acquisition of Liberty Global’s cable networks business in Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, and Germany, following a Phase II review.[1] This case is the latest in a wave of consolidation across the EEA’s telecommunications sector (such as Liberty Global/Ziggo, Vodafone/Liberty Global/Dutch JV, and Altice/PT Portugal).[2]
The Commission Is Investigating Amazon’s Use of Retailer Data
By Cleary Gottlieb on
On July 17, 2019, the Commission announced the opening of a formal investigation into Amazon’s use of sensitive independent retailer data that may potentially breach Article 101/102 TFEU.[1]