Short Reads

Den Bosch Court of Appeal revives damages claims in Dutch prestressing steel litigation

Den Bosch Court of Appeal revives damages claims in Dutch prestressin

Den Bosch Court of Appeal revives damages claims in Dutch prestressing steel litigation

06.02.2020 NL law

On 28 January 2020, the Court of Appeal of Den Bosch issued a ruling in the Dutch prestressing steel litigation. In its ruling, the Court of Appeal overturned a 2016 judgment of the District Court of Limburg, in which it was held that civil damages claims brought by Deutsche Bahn were time-barred under German law (see our January 2017 newsletter).

On appeal, the main issue concerns the retroactive application of Article 33(5) of the German Competition Act, which came into force in July 2005. Unsurprisingly, the Court of Appeal regarded a German Supreme Court judgment of June 2018 as the leading authority on the proper interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of German law.

The Court of Appeal will now proceed to review the merits of the claims and has invited the parties to submit briefs that are “no longer than 15 pages”.

In its ruling, the Court of Appeal confirms that the rules of the law applicable to Deutsche Bahn’s damages claims – here: German law – determine the relevant limitation periods as well as the interruption and the suspension thereof. Under German law, a ‘long-stop’ limitation period of ten years and a ‘short-stop’ period of three years apply. On appeal, the main issue concerns the suspension of those limitation periods under Article 33(5) of the German Competition Act (Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbbeschränkungen, "GWB") that came into force in July 2005. According to Deutsche Bahn, that provision triggered an automatic suspension of any running periods of limitation for the duration of the European Commission's investigation into the competition law infringement. The defendants challenged that position and argued that Article 33(5) GWB could not be applied retroactively to damages claims in relation to loss suffered prior to July 2005.

When the case was before the Limburg District Court, the retroactive application of Article 33(5) GWB was still a highly contentious issue under German law. However, the controversy was resolved when on 12 June 2018 the German Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) ruled that the provision applies to all competition damages claims regardless of whether they accrued before or after July 2005, provided that these claims had not yet become time-barred on the day on which Article 33(5) GWB entered into law. Unsurprisingly, the Court of Appeal of Den Bosch regarded that German Supreme Court judgment as the leading authority on the proper interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of German law, “even if the judgment drew criticism in German [legal] literature, as some of the respondents have argued”. 

The Court of Appeal will now proceed to review the merits of the claims and has invited the parties to submit briefs. However, the Court stresses that the briefs should be short – “no longer than 15 pages” – and should serve to convey any additional points the parties may wish to make, not to reiterate what the parties have already stated in earlier court briefs.

 

This article was published in the Competition Newsletter of February 2020. Other articles in this newsletter:

Team

Related news

26.03.2020 BE law
​I am suffering significant financial losses as a result of the spread of the corona virus. Is there a possibility of State aid?

Short Reads - COVID-19 brings certain questions to centre stage regarding State aid. In this short read, Peter Wytinck, Sophie Van Besien and Michèle de Clerck discuss the possibility of State aid in case of significant financial losses as a result of the spread of the corona virus.

Read more

05.03.2020 NL law
Swifter merger clearance and shorter merger filings in Belgium

Short Reads - Companies can expect swifter merger clearance and simpler filing rules in Belgium. The Belgian Competition Authority has published a communication with additional rules concerning the simplified procedure for certain types of concentrations. As a result, a new category of concentrations will be eligible for a simplified merger filing, leading to swifter approval and lower costs. It will also allow the BCA to focus its resources on more problematic and complex files.

Read more

10.03.2020 NL law
De AVG staat niet in de weg aan de verwerking van persoonsgegevens door een toezichthouder tijdens een bedrijfsbezoek

Short Reads - Bedrijven die met toezicht worden geconfronteerd, zijn gehouden op verzoek van een toezichthouder in beginsel alle informatie te verstrekken. Met de komst van de Algemene verordening gegevensbescherming (AVG) is in de praktijk de vraag opgekomen of een toezichthouder bevoegd is om persoonsgegevens die onderdeel uitmaken van de gevraagde informatie te verwerken.

Read more

05.03.2020 NL law
ECJ confirms: gun jumping is double trouble

Short Reads - Companies beware: the European Court of Justice has confirmed the Commission’s practice of imposing two separate fines for gun jumping; one for failing to notify a concentration prior to its implementation, and another for implementing the concentration before obtaining clearance. The ruling underlines, once again, the increased focus of competition authorities on procedural merger control breaches – good reason for companies to keep a watchful eye on their gun jumping obligations and to take note of the possibility of two separate gun jumping fines. 

Read more

05.03.2020 NL law
CBb confirms: no cartel fine, still interest to appeal cartel decision

Short Reads - Companies can challenge a decision establishing that they committed a competition law violation, even if no fine was imposed on them. The CBb – the highest court for public enforcement of cartel cases – recently confirmed that the absence of a fine does not affect a company’s interest to appeal. Consequently, parent companies held liable for a subsidiary’s cartel infringement can still challenge a cartel decision, irrespective of whether fines were imposed on them separately.

Read more

05.03.2020 NL law
Commission continues cross-border trade crusade

Short Reads - The European Commission is on a roll in its fight against territorial sales restrictions. Just one month after fining broadcast network company NBCUniversal for restricting cross-border sales, it has also imposed a fine on hotel group Meliá for discriminating between customers based on nationality or place of residence. Meanwhile, the Commission is urging national consumer protection authorities to tackle cross-border issues, after an EU-wide screening of nearly 500 e-shops showed that one fifth of the flagged websites did not respect the Geo-blocking Regulation. 

Read more

This website uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential for the technical functioning of our website and you cannot disable these cookies if you want to read our website. We also use functional cookies to ensure the website functions properly and analytical cookies to personalise content and to analyse our traffic. You can either accept or refuse these functional and analytical cookies.

Privacy – en cookieverklaring