SearchSearch results for: “”

The European Court of Justice has confirmed that Google abused its dominance by favouring its own shopping comparison service and demoting competing ones. However, not all favouritism is doomed.

The Court of Appeal of 's-Hertogenbosch ruled that several producers of prestressing steel are jointly and severally liable for potential loss that Deutsche Bahn may have suffered as a result of an infringement of competition law rules.

The District Court of Oost-Brabant recognized the res judicata effect of a Turkish court of appeal judgment, in which the Turkish court had dismissed antitrust damages claims brought by Vestel against Philips, Samsung, LGE, Technicolor, TTD and TDP.

The European Commission is on the prowl in the pharma sector. Recent cases on alleged disparagement and pipeline drugs-killings show that it is not afraid to show its teeth and, ultimately, bite.

The ink on the Digital Market Act has barely dried, but fast-evolving digital developments already have competition authorities calling for new tools. Is Big Tech not kept in check by the DMA, the antitrust rules and the EU Merger Regulation after all?

Although the text of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation is not aimed at specific countries, the European Commission’s initial enforcement actions appear to be targeting Chinese subsidies.

The European Court of Justice has upheld the annulment of Intel’s EUR 1.06 billion fine for abuse of dominance. The judgment provides guidance on how to assess the anti-competitiveness of loyalty rebates.

Dominant pharma companies had better watch their words and use the patent system wisely. Pharma company Teva was fined EUR 462.6 million for disparagement and ‘divisional gaming’ to delay market entry and hinder the uptake of a competing drug.

After 16 years of court battle, the Brussels Court of Appeal has rejected the EU’s EUR 12 million (+ interest) damage claim against the four lift producers that participated in the lift cartel fined in 2007.

The Foreign Subsidies Regulation has celebrated one year of its application. Time for companies to take stock of the lessons learnt from key developments of this first year. However, ambiguities remain and more is yet to come. Watch this space!

The Commission recently published its Draft Guidelines on Exclusionary Abuses of Dominance, which are meant to reflect the EU case law. However, they seem to deviate on important aspects, arguably simplifying the assessment for establishing an abuse.

The Belgian Competition Authority imposed a fine of €490,112 on Le Creuset for vertical price fixing (also known as resale price maintenance).

On 23 January 2024, the ACM announced its priorities for 2024. The energy transition, the digital economy and sustainability are still on the ACM’s priority list, but now with better-equipped enforcement methods available.

Companies have a new and improved tool for the competitive assessment of their conduct and intended acquisitions. The European Commission has updated its guidance on how to define relevant markets for the purpose of EU competition law enforcement.

The Brussels Commercial Court ruled on 18 December 2024 that the sale of cycling television rights in Belgium did not violate EU competition rules despite the lack of a formal tender procedure.

Are ‘European champion’ companies walled off from unfair (foreign) competition the future? The European Commission recently presented its Competitiveness Compass to navigate the European Union to strengthened competitiveness.