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]
The Council of State Confirms the Reduction by 60% Of the Fines Imposed by the ICA on the Members of an Alleged Cartels in the Ready-mix Concrete Sector
On July 24, 2020, the Council of State upheld three judgments issued by the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio (the “TAR Lazio”) in 2017,[1] which reduced by 60% the amount of the fines imposed by the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”)[2] in 2015 on three firms operating in the area of Belluno, in the Veneto Region (namely, Superbeton S.p.A., F.lli Romor S.r.l. and F.lli De Pra S.p.A., together the “Companies”). In contrast, the Council of State dismissed the cross-appeals submitted by the Companies that aimed to challenge the ICA’s finding of infringement.[3]
The French Competition Authority Publishes New Guidelines on Merger Control
On July 23, 2020, the FCA published its new guidelines on merger control[1] (the “Guidelines”), which came into effect on the same day and therefore replaced the previous guidelines issued in 2013.
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.
Strident Publishing Limited v Creative Scotland
On 21 July 2020, the CAT published a ruling refusing to grant Strident Publishing Limited (Strident) permission…
Phones4U Ltd (In Administration) v EE Ltd and others
On 17 July 2020, the High Court handed down a ruling on disclosure issues arising in the standalone competition damages case claim brought by Phones 4U Ltd’s (P4U) administrators against mobile network operators (MNOs) EE, Deutsche Telekom, Orange, Vodafone, and O2.
The Court of Justice Clarifies the Scope of the Commission’s Inspection Powers in Antitrust Proceedings
On July 16, 2020, the Court of Justice affirmed the judgement of the General Court in the Nexans v Commission, which upheld the Commission’s decision in the Power Cables cartel case.[1] In its judgment, the Court of Justice clarified the scope of the Commission’s inspection powers in antitrust proceedings under Article 20 of Regulation No. 1/2003.
The French Competition Authority Fines 12 Cold Meat Manufacturers €93 Million for Operating a Cartels
On July 16, 2020, the French Competition Authority (“FCA”) imposed a €93 million fine on 12 manufacturers for their participation in a cartel in the ham and cold meat sector.[1] The FCA started its investigation in 2012, following a complaint from a slaughterhouse and a leniency application by Campofrio, a cold meat manufacturer. The FCA subsequently conducted dawn raids at the 12 cold meat manufacturers’ premises in 2013.