Neodyum Miknatis
maderba.com
implant
olabahis
Casino Siteleri
canli poker siteleri meritslot
escort antalya
istanbul escort
sirinevler escort
antalya eskort bayan
brazzers
Short Reads

KLM and Amsterdam Schiphol airport offer commitments to reduce competition concerns

KLM and Amsterdam Schiphol airport offer commitments to reduce compet

KLM and Amsterdam Schiphol airport offer commitments to reduce competition concerns

01.11.2017 NL law

On 12 October 2017, the Dutch Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) published a draft decision accepting the commitments of Dutch airline KLM (KLM) and Amsterdam Schiphol airport (Schiphol). The commitments are aimed at eliminating the competition concerns identified by the ACM on the basis of a four-year investigation into interactions between KLM and Schiphol about growth opportunities of other airlines at Schiphol and airport capacity.

In 2013, the ACM started an investigation to assess whether KLM and Schiphol protected KLM's position at the airport in relation to other airlines. The ACM found that KLM and Schiphol had interactions regarding the allocation of airport capacity and facilities between KLM and its competitors. The ACM concluded in its draft decision that "such interactions created the risk that Schiphol would not set its strategy independently, but change it to accommodate KLM’s wishes. In this way, the growth opportunities of other airlines may have been frustrated". As a result, competition could be hindered and the position of the other airlines operating at Schiphol might be weakened. To address the ACM concerns, KLM and Schiphol offered the following commitments:

  • KLM and Schiphol will not have any contact with each other about: (i) the growth potential of other airlines at Schiphol and (ii) requests from competitors for airport facilities.
  • Schiphol will independently determine its tariff changes, marketing policies and investments. Any contact between KLM and Schiphol on these topics has to reported in writing.
  • Schiphol will create objective criteria to deal with requests from airlines for airport facilities.
  • KLM and Schiphol will (i) report to the ACM on the implementation of these commitments over a period of four months and (ii) allow the ACM to have access to the relevant documentation (e.g. reports on contacts and decisions on facility requests).

The ACM maintains that these commitments are sufficiently effective to address the competition risks identified and that they will help create a level playing field for airlines at Schiphol. The commitments will be binding for five years, although the ACM has the power to extend the duration if necessary. Interested parties have six weeks to respond to the commitments. The draft decision emphasizes that the ACM has not established an infringement and that by offering these commitments KLM and Schiphol do not acknowledge any violation of competition law.

This article was published in the Competition Law Newsletter of November 2017. Other articles in this newsletter:

  1. General Court annuls UPC/Ziggo merger decision
  2. General Court rules that luxury watchmakers can limit supply of parts to approved repairers
  3. General Court upholds fine for 'gun jumping' EU merger control procedure
  4. European Commission orders the recovery of State aid of around EUR 250 million from Amazon
  5. Nike can restrict sales via online platforms within its selective distribution system
  6. Dutch Trade and Industry Appeals Tribunal rules on cover pricing

Team

Related news

07.01.2021 NL law
Commission evaluates Antitrust Damages Directive: to be continued

Short Reads - On 14 December 2020, the Commission published a report on the implementation of the Antitrust Damages Directive (the Directive). The Commission observes a significant increase in antitrust damages actions since the adoption of the Directive. However, there is insufficient experience with the new Directive to properly evaluate its application. Instead, the Commission provides a concise overview of the implementation of some key aspects of the Directive.

Read more

07.01.2021 NL law
Amsterdam District Court puts a halt to unlimited forum shopping

Short Reads - On 25 November 2020, the Amsterdam District Court (the Court) declined jurisdiction over all non-Dutch defendants (the foreign defendants) in proceedings for compensation of damage based partly on an infringement of Article 101 TFEU. The proceedings were initiated by four public utility companies from the Gulf States (claimants) against both Dutch and foreign defendants.

Read more

07.01.2021 NL law
ACM study calls for regulation of Big Techs on payment market

Short Reads - The ACM’s market study, published on 1 December 2020, provides an overview of recent and upcoming developments concerning the role of Big Tech companies in both online and offline payment markets in the Netherlands. Although Big Tech companies currently have a relatively limited presence in these markets, the ACM expects significant expansion in the near future given these companies’ ability to leverage existing market power on other (platform) markets.

Read more

07.01.2021 NL law
Do the math: ACM publishes strategy on monitoring use algorithms

Short Reads - The ACM worries that the use of algorithms may lead to the creation of cartels, or nudge consumers towards a purchasing decision that is not in their best interest. Therefore, on 10 December 2020, it published a new policy document (in Dutch) setting out what businesses can expect when the ACM checks their algorithms. On the same day, the ACM also launched a trial with online music library Muziekweb to improve the ACM’s knowledge about the categories of data that are likely to be relevant in such investigations. All signs indicate the ACM’s intention to become more active in this area.

Read more

07.01.2021 NL law
(Geo)blockbuster: Canal+ ruling annuls commitment decision

Short Reads - A heads-up for companies seeking to settle in antitrust proceedings: commercially-affected third party complainants are not to be ignored. The Canal+ judgment marks the first time a commitment decision has been successfully challenged since the adoption of Regulation 1/2003. The European Court of Justice annulled the commitment decision on the ground that the Commission failed to take into account the rights of contractual parties affected by the commitments.

Read more