Short Reads

Abuse of economic dependence and unfair contract terms in B2B relations: ready for 2020?

Abuse of economic dependence and unfair contract terms in B2B relatio

Abuse of economic dependence and unfair contract terms in B2B relations: ready for 2020?

03.07.2019 BE law

Belgium recently adopted a new act prohibiting (1) the abuse of economic dependence, (2) the use of unfair contract terms and (3) unfair market practices in B2B relationships.

Non-dominant companies are well-advised to assess their position of economic dependency towards one another to ensure compliance with the new rules and seek possible justifications for certain practices. In addition, and independent of any position of dominance or economic dependence, contracts will have to be revised. The prohibitions are set to enter into force in 2020 (and those of unfair commercial practices already in September 2019), so companies should start making their evaluations now; as the saying goes, well-begun is half-done.

The Belgian act introduces the following three prohibitions:

1. A prohibition on the abuse of a situation of economic dependence, entering into force 1 June 2020.

The prohibition on abuse of economic dependence is inspired by similar provisions in other member states, such as France and Germany. It concerns situations where one company is in a specific weak position towards its counterpart(s), even where the other company is not in a dominant position. Economic dependence is defined as the position of submission of one company to another, characterised by (i) the absence of a reasonable equivalent alternative that is available within a reasonable time and under reasonable conditions and costs (ii) that allows this company to impose conditions that cannot be obtained under normal market conditions. Notably, the position of economic dependence is not prohibited; only the abuse of it. The act lists examples of such abuses which are entirely inspired by the list of prohibited abuses of a dominant position contained in article 102 TFEU and article IV.1 of Belgium's Code of economic law.

The abuse of economic dependence is qualified as a new category of restrictive practice, alongside the existing prohibitions on cartels and abuse of dominant position. As a result, the Belgian competition authorities are fully competent to investigate such practices and impose sanctions, including fines up to a maximum of 2% of the worldwide turnover of the company concerned. Ordinary judges too will remain competent to sanction such practices and to impose damages.

2. A prohibition on unfair terms in B2B contracts: a black list, a grey list, and a general prohibition on apparent imbalance in the contract terms, entering into force on 1 December 2020 for future contracts.

Regarding the unfair terms, the act specifies four clauses (in the so-called black list) which are always prohibited in B2B contracts, as well as eight clauses (the so-called grey list) which are only allowed in contracts if they can be justified. The grey list includes clauses on limitation of liability, unilateral modifications of prices and characteristics of the contract, limitation of damages, among others. These rules also apply outside any situation of economic dependence. On top, the act in general prohibits clauses that create a non-justifiable imbalance. The new rules will significantly impact existing contract terms and will oblige companies to review clauses in future contracts.

3. A prohibition on misleading and aggressive market practices in B2B relationships, entering into force on 1 September 2019.

The rules on unfair practices prohibit misleading and aggressive practices in a B2B context. The current prohibition on unfair market practices in B2B is thereby further clarified and extended.

 

This article was published in the Competition Law Newsletter of July 2019. Other articles in this newsletter:

Related news

01.08.2019 NL law
General court dismisses all five appeals in the optical disk drives cartel

Short Reads - The General Court recently upheld a Commission decision finding that suppliers of optical disk drives colluded in bids for sales to Dell and HP by engaging in a network of parallel bilateral contacts over a multi-year period. The General Court rejected applicants' arguments regarding the Commission's fining methodology, including that the Commission ought to have provided reasons for not departing from the general methodology set out in its 2006 Guidelines.

Read more

14.08.2019 BE law
Verklaring van openbaar nut is geen "project" in de zin van de MER-regelgeving

Articles - In een recent arrest bevestigt de Raad van State dat "verklaringen van openbaar nut", bedoeld in artikel 10 van de wet van 12 april 1965 betreffende het vervoer van gasachtige produkten en andere door middel van leidingen niet onder het begrip "project" uit de project-MER-regelgeving valt. Of hetzelfde geldt voor elk type gelijkaardige administratieve toelating, is daarmee evenwel nog niet gezegd. Niettemin geeft de Raad met zijn arrest een belangrijk signaal dat niet elke mogelijke toelating onder de project-MER-regelgeving valt.

Read more

01.08.2019 NL law
Brand owners beware: Commission tough on cross-border sales restrictions

Short Reads - The European Commission recently imposed a EUR 6.2 million fine on Hello Kitty owner Sanrio for preventing its licensees from selling licensed merchandising products across the entire EEA. Sanrio is the second licensor (after Nike) to be fined for imposing territorial sales restrictions on its non-exclusive licensees for licensed merchandise. A third investigation into allegedly similar practices by Universal Studios is ongoing. The case confirms the Commission's determination to tackle these practices, regardless of type or form.

Read more

08.08.2019 BE law
Regulating online platforms: piece of the puzzle

Articles - The new Regulation no. 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services, applicable as of 12 July 2020, is another piece of the puzzle regulating online platforms, this time focussing on the supply side of the platforms.

Read more

01.08.2019 NL law
Call of duty: Commission must state reasons when straying from its guidelines

Short Reads - The European Commission has lost a second battle concerning its EUR 15 million fine imposed upon interdealer broker ICAP, this time before the European Court of Justice. The Court upheld the previous judgment of the General Court on the basis of the Commission's failure to state reasons concerning its fining methodology of cartel facilitator ICAP. This may lead to more reasoned Commission decisions in the future - deterrence of cartel behaviour does not justify keeping the methodology for setting the fines as a 'black box'.

Read more

Our website uses functional cookies for the functioning of the website and analytic cookies that enable us to generate aggregated visitor data. We also use other cookies, such as third party tracking cookies - please indicate whether you agree to the use of these other cookies:

Privacy – en cookieverklaring