Click the case name for better results:

Intel Corporation v Via Technologies Inc and others: ChD 14 Jun 2002

The claimant sought damages for patent infringement. The respondent asserted that the refusal to licence the patent amounted to an abuse of its dominant position. Complaint had also been brought in the US. Held: The licence offered by Intel would distort the market. The refusal to licence on other terms prevented other companies even getting … Continue reading Intel Corporation v Via Technologies Inc and others: ChD 14 Jun 2002

Blue Circle Industries v Commission: ECFI 15 Mar 2000

ECJ Competition – Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) – Cement market – Rights of the defence – Access to the file – Single and continuous infringement – General agreement and measures of implementation – Liability for an infringement – Evidence of participation in the general agreement and measures of implementation … Continue reading Blue Circle Industries v Commission: ECFI 15 Mar 2000

Masterfoods Ltd v HB Ice Cream Ltd: ECJ 14 Dec 2000

Masterfoods Ltd, a subsidiary of Mars Inc, brought proceedings in Ireland against HB Ice Cream Ltd, a subsidiary of Unilever, for a declaration that its agreements to provide retailers with freezer cabinets on terms that they stocked only HB ice cream contravened articles 81 and 82. On 28 May 1992 the High Court dismissed the … Continue reading Masterfoods Ltd v HB Ice Cream Ltd: ECJ 14 Dec 2000

Compagnie Maritime Belge Transports and others v Commission: ECJ 16 Mar 2000

ECJ It is clear from the very wording of Articles 85(1)(a), (b), (d) and (e) and 86(a) to (d) of the Treaty (now Articles 81(1)(a), (b), (d) and (e) EC and 82(a) to (d) EC) that the same practice may give rise to an infringement of both provisions. Simultaneous application of Articles 85 and 86 … Continue reading Compagnie Maritime Belge Transports and others v Commission: ECJ 16 Mar 2000

Adidas-Salomon Ag v Drape and others: ChD 7 Jun 2006

The claimants had sponsored tennis players to wear their logo. The respondents organised tennis tournaments whose intended rules would prevent the display of the claimant’s logos. The claimants said that the restriction interfered with their rights to trade within Europe. Held: The rules were potentially a breach of the claimants rights to trade, and an … Continue reading Adidas-Salomon Ag v Drape and others: ChD 7 Jun 2006