Tag: Commercial

Commission / Dei (Bibliographic Notice): ECJ 5 Dec 2013

ECJ Opinion – Appeals – Competition – Articles 82 EC and 86, paragraph 1, CE – Continuing special rights granted by Greece in favor of a public company for the exploration and exploitation of lignite deposits – Competitive Advantage in the markets the supply of lignite and electricity wholesale through the exercise of these rights – Extension of the dominant position of the first to the second of these markets – Obligation for the Commission to establish abusive behavior on the part of the company public

Melchior Wathelet AG
C-553/12, [2013] EUECJ C-553/12, [2014] EUECJ C-553/12, [2013] EUECJ C-553/12 – O
Bailii, Bailii, Bailii

European, Commercial

Updated: 28 November 2021; Ref: scu.519466

Scotch Whisky Association And Others v Lord Advocate, Advocate General for Scotland: ECJ 23 Dec 2015

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common organisation of the markets in agricultural products – Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 – Free movement of goods – Article 34 TFEU – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect – Minimum price of alcoholic drinks calculated according to the alcoholic strength of the product – Justification – Article 36 TFEU – Protection of human life and health – Assessment by the national court
‘I consider that the existence of a CMO covering the wine sector does not prevent the national authorities from taking action in the exercise of their competence in order to adopt measures to protect health and, in particular, to combat alcohol abuse. However, where the national measure constitutes a breach of the principle of the free formation of selling prices that constitutes a component of the single CMO Regulation, the principle of proportionality requires that the national measure must actually meet the objective of the protection of human health and must not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain that objective.
As the commission suggests, I consider that the examination of the proportionality of the measure must be undertaken in the context of the analysis that must be carried out by reference to article 36 TFEU.
Consequently, I propose that the answer to the first question should be that the single CMO Regulation must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude national rules, such as those at issue, which prescribe a minimum retail price for wines according to the quantity of alcohol in the product sold, provided that those rules are justified by the objectives of the protection of human health, and in particular the objective of combating alcohol abuse, and do not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.’
‘A barrier to the free movement of goods may be justified on one of the public interest grounds set out in article 36 TFEU or in order to meet overriding requirements. In either case, the restrictions imposed by the member states must none the less satisfy the conditions laid down in the court’s case law as regards their proportionality. In that regard, in order for national rules to comply with the principle of proportionality, it is necessary to ascertain not only whether the means which they implement are appropriate to ensure attainment of the objective pursued, but also that those means do not go beyond what is necessary to attain that objective: Berlington Hungary Tanacsado es Szolgaltato kft v Magyar Allam (Case C-98/14) [2015] 3 CMLR 45, para 64.
Although the words generally used by the court seem most frequently to result in only two different stages of the control of proportionality being distinguished, the intellectual exercise followed in order to determine whether a national measure is proportionate is generally broken down into three successive stages.
The first stage, corresponding to the test of suitability or appropriateness, consists in ascertaining that the act adopted is suitable for attaining the aim sought.
The second stage, relating to the test of necessity, sometimes also known as the ‘minimum interference test’, entails a comparison between the national measure at issue and the alternative solutions that would allow the same objective as that pursued by the national measure to be attained but would impose fewer restrictions on trade.
The third stage, corresponding to the test of proportionality in the strict sense, assumes the balancing of the interests involved. More precisely, it consists in comparing the extent of the interference which the national measure causes to the freedom under consideration and the contribution which that measure could secure for the protection of the objective pursued.’

R. Silva de Lapuerta, P
ECLI:EU:C:2015:845, [2015] EUECJ C-333/14, [2016] 1 WLR 2283, [2015] WLR(D) 544
Bailii, WLRD
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, TFEU 34
European
Citing:
See Also – Scotch Whisky Association and Others v The Lord Advocate and Another SCS 30-Apr-2014
(Extra Division, Inner House, Court of Session) Reclaiming motion is brought against the Lord Ordinary’s decision rejecting the petitioners’ challenge to the provisions of the 2012 Act. Reference to ECJ . .
See Also – The Scotch Whisky Association and Others, Re Judicial Review SCS 26-Sep-2012
Outer House – application by Alcohol Focus Scotland for permission to intervene in the public interest in a judicial review application by The Scotch Whisky Association and two European bodies which represent producers of spirit drinks and the wine . .
See Also – The Scotch Whisky Association and Others, Re Judicial Review SCS 3-May-2013
(Outer House, Court of Session) The petitioners challenged the legality of an enactment of the Scottish Parliament – the Act. They also challenged the legality of the Scottish Ministers’ decision that they would make an Order setting the minimum . .
See Also – Scotch Whisky Association and Others for Judicial Review SCS 11-Jul-2014
Extra Division, Inner House – Further application for leave to intervene. . .
Cited – Commission v Italy (Free Movement Of Goods) ECJ 10-Feb-2009
ecJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations Article 28 EC Concept of ‘measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on imports’ Prohibition on mopeds, motorcycles, motor tricycles and . .

Cited by:
At ECJ – The Scotch Whisky Association and Others v The Lord Advocate and Another SCS 21-Oct-2016
The Association sought to challenge the legality of the 2012 Act and orders made under it. The Government’s contended that the Act would bring health benefits of one sort or another to at least part of the population.
Held: In a reclaiming . .
At ECJ – Scotch Whisky Association and Others v The Lord Advocate and Another SC 15-Nov-2017
The Association challenged the imposition of minimum pricing systems for alcohol, saying that it was in breach of European law. After a reference to the ECJ, the Court now considered its legality.
Held: The Association’s appeal failed. Minimum . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commercial, Health

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.565749

Hitachi And Others v Commission: ECFI 12 Jul 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market in gas insulated switchgear projects – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Market-sharing – Rights of the defence – Proof of the infringement – Single and continuous infringement – Fines – Gravity and duration of the infringement – Deterrent effect – Cooperation.

[2011] EUECJ T-112/07
Bailii
European

Commercial

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.441788

Regina v Monopolies and Mergers Commission, ex parte Argyll Group plc: CA 14 Mar 1986

Weighing Interest of Seeker of Judicial Review

The court recast in simpler language the provision in section 75 empowering the Secretary of State to make a merger reference to the Commission: ‘where it appears to him that it is or may be the fact that arrangements are in progress or in contemplation which, if carried into effect, will result in the creation of a merger situation qualifying for investigation.’
The test for the issue of judicial review proceedings was set out as follows: ‘The first stage test, which is applied upon the application for leave, will lead to a refusal if the applicant has no interest whatsoever and is, in truth, no more than a meddlesome busybody. If, however, the application appears to be otherwise arguable and there is no other discretionary bar, such as dilatoriness on the part of the applicant, the applicant may expect to get leave to apply, leaving the test of interest or standing to be re-applied as a matter of discretion on the hearing of the substantive application. At this second stage, the strength of the applicant’s interest is one of the factors to be weighed in the balance.’
‘Good public administration requires decisiveness and finality, unless there are compelling reasons to the contrary.’

Sir John Donaldson MR, Dillon LJ, Neill LJ
[1986] 1 WLR 763, [1987] QB 815, (1986) 2 BCC 99086, [1986] EWCA Civ 8, [1986] 2 All ER 257
Bailii
Senior Courts Act 1981 31(3)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Office of Fair Trading and others v IBA Health Limited CA 19-Feb-2004
The OFT had considered whether it was necessary to refer a merger between two companies to the Competition Commission, and decided against. The Competition Appeal Tribunal held that the proposed merger should have been referred. The OFT and parties . .
Cited – Brown v HM Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, the Executors of the Estate of and others FD 5-Jul-2007
The plaintiff sought the unsealing of the wills of the late Queen Mother and of the late Princess Margaret, claiming that these would assist him establishing that he was the illegitimate son of the latter.
Held: The application was frivolous. . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ex Parte the World Development Movement Ltd Admn 10-Nov-1994
The Movement sought to challenge decisions of the Secretary of state to give economic aid to the Pergau Dam, saying that it was not required ‘for the purpose of promoting the development’ of Malaysia. It was said to be uneconomic and damaging. It . .
Cited – Regina v Cotswold District Council and others ex parte Barrington Parish Council Admn 24-Apr-1997
The parish council sought judicial review of the district council’s planning decision. The respondents complained at the lack of promptness in the application, and suggested a lack of standing to complain. . .
Cited – Walton v The Scottish Ministers SC 17-Oct-2012
The appellant, former chair of a road activist group, challenged certain roads orders saying that the respondent had not carried out the required environmental assessment. His claim was that the road had been adopted without the consultation . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commercial, Judicial Review

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.194045

Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Harper’s Garage (Stourport) Ltd: HL 1968

Agreement in Restraint of Trade Unenforceable

The defendant ran two garages under solus agreements with the plaintiffs who complained when the defendants began to purchase petrol from cheaper alternative sources. The House was asked whether the solus agreements were be regarded in law as an agreement in restraint of trade.
Held: An agreement in restraint of trade is not generally unlawful if the parties choose to abide by it: it is only unenforceable if a party chooses not to abide by it. It was necessary to ascertain the legitimate interests of the landlords which they were entitled to protect and to discover whether those restraints exceeded what was adequate for that purpose. The doctrine of restraint of trade had no application to restraints imposed on persons who, before the transaction by which the restraints were imposed, had no right whatsoever to trade at all on the land in question.
Lord Hodson said: ‘When one remembers that the basis of the doctrine of restraint of trade is the protection of the public interest, it is not difficult to see how the law developed in its conception of reasonableness as the test which must be passed in order to save a contract in restraint of trade from unenforceability.’
Lord Reid said: ‘It has often been said that a person is not entitled to be protected against mere competition. I do not find that very helpful in a case like the present. I think it better to ascertain what were the legitimate interests of the appellants which they were entitled to protect and then to see whether these restraints were more than adequate for that purpose.’

Lord Reid, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Hodson, Lord Pearce, Lord Wilberforce
[1968] AC 269, [1967] UKHL 1, [1967] 1 All ER 699
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Young v Timmins 1831
The servant had agreed not to work for anyone else bu the employer, but he might have been given no work and he received no remuneration for considerable periods.
Held: He had been deprived of a livelihood, and the agreement was in restraint . .
Cited – Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Company HL 1894
Exceptions to Freedom to Trade
The purchaser of the goodwill of a business sought to enforce a covenant in restraint of trade given by the seller.
Held: At common law a restraint of trade is prima facie contrary to public policy and void, unless it can be shown that the . .
Cited – Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Australia v Adelaide Steamship Company PC 1913
ag_adeleaidePC1913
There was an agreement between a group of colliery owners and a group of shipowners which was ancillary to an agreement between the colliery owners themselves. Each agreement was in restraint of trade.
Held: Lord Parker explained the doctrine . .
Cited – Mogul Steamship Co Ltd v McGregor, Gow and Co HL 18-Dec-1891
An association of shipowners agreed to use various lawful means to dissuade customers from shipping their goods by the Mogul line.
Held: The agreement was lawful in the sense that it gave the Mogul Company no right to sue them. But (majority) . .
Cited – Foley v Classique Coaches Ltd CA 1934
The sellers had sold to the buyers a piece of land to use in the latter’s business as coach proprietors, and also contracted with them to supply all the petrol required for that business ‘at a price to be agreed by the parties in writing and from . .
Cited – English Hop Growers v Dering CA 1928
The defendant farmer had agreed to sell his crop of hops to the Society for five years. He failed to do so and was sued. He replied that the contract was in restraint of trade.
Held: The restraint was reasonable. Scrutton LJ allowed that it . .
Cited – McEllistrim v Ballymacelligott Co-operative Society HL 1919
The Co-operative had changed its rules to prevent any member from selling (except under heavy penalty) any milk produced by him in a large area of County Kerry to anyone except the Society, and a member could not terminate his membership without the . .
Cited – Servais Bouchard v Princes Hall Restaurant CA 1904
A contract by which defendant Restaurant agreed to take all burgundy sold there from the plaintiffs was held not to be void for being in restraint of trade. . .
Cited – Herbert Morris Ltd v Saxelby HL 1916
For a covenant in restraint of trade to be treated as reasonable in the interests of the parties ‘it must afford no more than adequate protection to the benefit of the party in whose favour it is imposed.’ There is a need for the court to consider . .
Cited – United Shoe Machinery Company of Canada v Brunet PC 23-Mar-1909
(Quebec) The defendant Company leased machinery under a condition that it should not be used in conjunction with machinery made by any other manufacturer.
Held: The condition was not in restraint of trade. . .
Cited – Biggs v Hoddinott 1898
The owner of a freehouse had agreed to a tie in favour of a brewer who had lent him money. . .
Cited – Warner Brothers Pictures v Nelson 1936
Bette Davis contracted with the plaintiff film company to render her services as an actress exclusively to that company. With nearly six years of the contractual term yet to run, Ms Davis contracted with a third person to appear as a film artist. . .

Cited by:
Cited – WWF -World Wide Fund for Nature (Formerly World Wildlife Fund), World Wildlife Fund Inc v World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Inc ChD 1-Oct-2001
The Fund sought summary relief against the use of the sign ‘WWF’ by the defendants, in breach of a contract. The defendants urged that the contract operated in restraint of trade. There had been long running and widespread trade mark disputes, . .
Cited – Alec Lobb (Garages) Ltd v Total Oil Ltd CA 1985
The court was asked whether the terms of a lease and lease back amounted to an unconscionable bargain and was unenforceable.
Held: The court affirmed the decision at first instance, but emphasised the need for unconscientious behaviour rather . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Commercial

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.180312

Dickson v Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain: HL 1970

The Society was concerned by the extension of the range of non-pharmaceutical goods sold in chemist’s shops and the effect which it might have on the quality and status of the profession, proposed a new rule for inclusion in the code of ethics and submitted it in the form of a motion to a specially convened meeting of the members. The effect of the rule would be that new pharmacies would have to be situated in physically distinct premises and their trading activities confined to pharmaceutical and traditional goods as defined in a report of one of the society’s committees. The main object of the society was ‘to maintain the honour and safeguard and promote the interests of the members in the exercise of the profession of pharmacy’. The respondent, a member of the society, brought an action for a declaration that the motion was ultra vires the society’s objects and in unreasonable restraint of trade.
Held: The rules against arrangement imposing restrictions on trade are not limited to particular kinds of restraint, and are not confined to contractual arrangements but apply to all restraints of trade, howsoever imposed. If the effect of the decision is unreasonably in restraint of trade the courts will declare it invalid.
Lord Reid said: ‘ There are about 29,000 registered pharmacists. Some, such as those employed in hospitals, have no other duties than the professional task of dispensing. But the typical pharmacist owns or is employed in a chemist’s shop where goods other than dispensed medicines are sold to the public. Such goods have been divided into three classes: first ‘professional’, which include, besides medicines and sick room requirements, agricultural, horticultural, and industrial chemicals and various scientific and other appliances; secondly, ‘traditional’, which, largely for historical reasons include cosmetics and photographic requisites; and thirdly ‘non-traditional’, which include a wide variety of articles which many pharmacists have found it profitable and convenient to sell in chemist’s shops. So most pharmacists act in a dual capacity, combining retail trading with their professional work. That pharmacists should be engaged in trade is regarded by many pharmacists as undesirable. But it is generally recognised that comparatively few chemist’s shops could survive without engaging in some degree of trading . .
In every profession of which I have any knowledge there is a code of conduct, written or unwritten, which makes it improper for members of the profession to engage in certain activities in which ordinary members of the public are quite entitled to engage. Normally this is regarded as a domestic matter within the profession. But it appears to me that if a member of a profession can show that a particular restriction on his activities goes beyond anything which can reasonably be related to the maintenance of professional honour or standards, the court must be able to intervene, and in the present case there is a question whether these restrictions are within the objects of the society. In Jenkin v. Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain it was held that certain attempts to regulate trading by the members were ultra vires. But the respondent does not dispute that the society is entitled to regulate such trading activities in so far as that is reasonably necessary to achieve the society’s objects set out in the Charter. So it becomes a question whether these restrictions can properly be related to the maintenance or improvement of the status of the profession of pharmacy.
That these restrictions are in restraint of trade cannot be doubted. Any pharmacist who opens a new chemist’s shop can only sell professional or traditional goods in it, and in any existing chemist’s shop no new classes of non-traditional goods can be sold unless the council consents. This restraint may severely hamper the shopkeeper, and indeed it may make the business so unprofitable that the shop has to be closed. I need not consider the wider aspects of public interest, whether that might seriously inconvenience members of the public who wish to have prescriptions dispensed or to buy medicines.’

Lord Reid
[1970] AC 403
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Bermuda Cablevision Limited and others v Colica Trust Company Limited PC 6-Oct-1997
(Bermuda) An alternative remedy to winding up is available to a shareholder where oppressive conduct is alleged, though the main thrust is that the conduct is unlawful. . .
Cited – Bermuda Cablevision Limited and others v Colica Trust Company Limited PC 6-Oct-1997
(Bermuda) An alternative remedy to winding up is available to a shareholder where oppressive conduct is alleged, though the main thrust is that the conduct is unlawful. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Commercial

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.221578

Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Australia v Adelaide Steamship Company: PC 1913

ag_adeleaidePC1913

There was an agreement between a group of colliery owners and a group of shipowners which was ancillary to an agreement between the colliery owners themselves. Each agreement was in restraint of trade.
Held: Lord Parker explained the doctrine of restraint of trade: ‘Monopolies and contracts in restraint of trade have this in common, that they both, if enforced, involve a derogation from the common law right in virtue of which any member of the community may exercise any trade or business he pleases and in such manner as he thinks best in his own interests.’
and ‘Contracts in restraint of trade were subject to somewhat different considerations. There is little doubt that the common law in the earlier stages of its growth treated all such contracts as contracts of imperfect obligation, if not void for all purposes; they were said to be against public policy in the sense that it was deemed impolitic to enforce them.’
and ‘It is only necessary to add that no contract was ever an offence at common law merely because it was in restraint of trade. The parties to such a contract, even if unenforceable, were always at liberty to act on it in the manner agreed. Similarly combinations, not amounting to contracts, in restraint of trade were never unlawful at common law. To make any such contract or combination unlawful it must amount to a criminal conspiracy, and the essence of a criminal conspiracy is a contract or combination to do something unlawful, or something lawful by unlawful means. The right of the individual to carry on his trade or business in the manner he considers best in his own interests involves the right of combining with others in a common course of action, provided such common course of action is undertaken with a single view to the interests of the combining parties and not with a view to injure others

Lord Parker
[1913] AC 781
Citing:
Cited – Mogul Steamship Co Ltd v McGregor, Gow and Co HL 18-Dec-1891
An association of shipowners agreed to use various lawful means to dissuade customers from shipping their goods by the Mogul line.
Held: The agreement was lawful in the sense that it gave the Mogul Company no right to sue them. But (majority) . .

Cited by:
Cited – Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Harper’s Garage (Stourport) Ltd HL 1968
Agreement in Restraint of Trade Unenforceable
The defendant ran two garages under solus agreements with the plaintiffs who complained when the defendants began to purchase petrol from cheaper alternative sources. The House was asked whether the solus agreements were be regarded in law as an . .
Cited – Norris v United States of America and others HL 12-Mar-2008
The detainee appealed an order for extradition to the USA, saying that the offence (price-fixing) was not one known to English common law. The USA sought his extradition under the provisions of the Sherman Act.
Held: It was not, and it would . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Commercial

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.259685

Canal Digital Danmark A?S: ECJ 26 Oct 2016

Misleading Advertising of Subscription Charges

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Unfair commercial practices – Directive 2005/29/EC – Articles 6 and 7 – Advertising relating to a satellite TV subscription – Subscription price including, in addition to the monthly subscription charge, a six-monthly charge for the card required for decoding emissions – Six-monthly charge omitted or presented in a less conspicuous manner than the monthly charge – Misleading action – Misleading omission – Transposition of a provision of a directive only in the preparatory work for the national transposing legislation and not in the wording of that legislation itself

ECLI:EU:C:2016:800, [2016] EUECJ C-611/14, [2016] WLR(D) 550
Bailii, WLRD
Directive 2005/29/EC
European

Commercial, Media

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.570580

Shanning International Ltd (in liquidation) v Lloyds Bank plc Lloyds Bank plc v Rasheed Bank: HL 2 Jul 2001

Under a series of cross guarantees, equipment was supplied to Iraq. Final payment was due on delivery of the final equipment. Before it could be delivered, the prohibitions came into effect against satisfying or making any claims in connection with transactions in matters covered by the UN resolution. The company went into liquidation, and sought claims under the guarantees from the bank. The bank agreed liability if it could itself be excused liability to the Iraqi company. It was held that the intention was to create a permanent prohibition. To hold otherwise would risk reviving contractual obligations which could no longer be performed. The ban might end but prohibition on the enforcement of earlier contracts must remain.
Bingham, Steyn, Hope, Hobhouse, Scott L
Times 02-Jul-2001, Gazette 23-Aug-2001, [2001] UKHL 31, [2001] 1 WLR 1462, [2001] 3 CMLR 14
Bailii, House of Lords
Council Regulation (EEC) 3541/92
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Shanning International Limited (In Liquidation) v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc (Formerly Lloyds Bank Plc) Part 20 and Rasheed Bank and Sbg Holdings Limited Part 20 CA 25-May-2000
. .
At first instance – Shanning International Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank plc; Lloyds TSB Bank plc v Rasheed Bank and another ComC 17-Dec-1999
The parties were linked together by a series of bonds, deposits, and guarantees and indemnities which had been designed to enable trade with a customer in Iraq. The Regulation operated to prevent any claim being made under the bond, and therefore . .
Cited – Litster and Others v Forth Dry Dock and Engineering Co Ltd HL 16-Mar-1989
The twelve applicants had been unfairly dismissed by the transferor immediately before the transfer, and for a reason connected with the transfer under section 8(1). The question was whether the liability for unfair dismissal compensation . .
Cited – William Dowling v Ireland, Attorney General and Minister for Agriculture and Foods ECJ 22-Oct-1992
Europa The combined provisions of Articles 3(3) and 3a of Regulation No 857/84, as amended by Regulation No 764/89 and subsequently by Regulation No 1639/91, do not provide for any possibility of granting a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 September 2021; Ref: scu.89187

Gallaher Group Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Competition and Markets Authority: SC 16 May 2018

No Administrative Duty of Equal Treatment

Extent and consequences of duties of ‘equal treatment’ or ‘fairness’, said to have been owed by the Office of Fair Trading to those subject to investigation under the Competition Act 1998. The respondent had entered negotiations with several parties to secure settlements of alleged breaches of competition law. The appellants complained that another company had been given settlement agreements better than theirs.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The company had not requested the particular term offered to the other party. Domestic administrative law does not recognise a distinct principle of equal treatment. Consistency is a generally desirable objective, but not an absolute rule. The OFT applied a consistent set of legal and policy criteria. A legitimate expectation of equal treatment had been created, but said nothing as to the legal consequences of such an expectation.
Lord Mance, Deputy President, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs
[2018] UKSC 25, [2018] WLR(D) 300, UKSC 2016/0185, [2019] AC 96, [2018] 4 All ER 183, [2018] 5 CMLR 2, [2018] 2 WLR 1583, [2018] Bus LR 1313
Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Vid Simmary, SC Vid 2018 Mar 13 am, SC Vid 2018 Mar pm, SC Vid 2018 Mar 19 am
Competition Act 1998 2(1) 31
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Gallaher Group Ltd and Another v Competition and Markets Authority CA 15-Jul-2016
Restriction or distortion of competition . .
Cited – Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
Cited – Commissioners of the European Communities v Assidoman Kraft Produncts Ab and Others ECJ 14-Sep-1999
Wood Pulp II
A decision of the Commission imposing penalties against several business concerns was challenged successfully by some of those penalised. Others who had not made the challenge applied to have the decision annulled for themselves also. The court said . .
Cited – The Office of Fair Trading v Somerfield Stores Ltd and Another CA 7-Apr-2014
The court was asked whether the Competition Appeal Tribunal was right to find that there were ‘exceptional circumstances’ justifying an extension of time for appealing a decision of the Appellant, the Office of Fair Trading. The court held that . .
Cited – Middlebrook Mushrooms Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Agricultural Wages Board of England and Wales Admn 18-Jun-2004
The company complained that whereas the generality of employers in agriculture were exempt from control under the minimum wage system, mushroom growers had not been exempted.
Held: The withdrawal of the exemption was irrational and . .
Cited – Crest Nicholson Plc v Office of Fair Trading Admn 24-Jul-2009
The company challenged as unfair its treatment by the respondent in imposing fines for anti-competive behaviour. The claimant was successor of the company who had misbehaved, but the claimant no longer operated in the area and had no employees from . .
Cited – Regina v Commissioners of Inland Revenue, ex parte Unilever plc CA 1996
The Revenue had refused to exercise a discretion in favour of the taxpayer in the same form it had granted for over twenty years. The taxpayer complained that this was unfair.
Held: The new approach to late applications, brought in without any . .
Cited – Regina v The National Lottery Commission ex parte Camelot Group Plc Admn 21-Sep-2000
The Commission had considered bids tendered in open competition to run The National Lottery. Neither of the two candidates who entered bids was considered to have satisfied all the criteria necessary to be given the relevant licence. The Commission . .
Cited – Kone Bv v European Commission ECJ 24-Oct-2013
ECJ Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for the installation and maintenance of elevators and escalators – Fines – Notice on immunity from fines and reduction of fines in . .
Cited – Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC 19-Jun-2013
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .
Cited – O’Brien and others v Independent Assessor HL 14-Mar-2007
The claimants had been wrongly imprisoned for a murder they did not commit. The assessor had deducted from their compensation a sum to represent the living costs they would have incurred if living freely. They also appealed differences from a . .
Cited – Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food HL 14-Feb-1968
Exercise of Ministerial Discretion
The Minister had power to direct an investigation in respect of any complaint as to the operation of any marketing scheme for agricultural produce. Milk producers complained about the price paid by the milk marketing board for their milk when . .
Cited – HTV Ltd v Price Commission CA 1976
Policies created by public bodies are a means of promoting consistency while not fettering the discretion of a public body. They allow others to know how the authority will respond to those who must deal with the authority. In maiing such policies: . .
Cited – Regina v Inland Revenue Commission ex parte Preston; In re Preston HL 1984
Duty of Fairness to taxpayer – Written Assurance
The applicant was assured by the Inland Revenue that it would not raise further inquiries on certain tax affairs if he agreed to forgo interest relief which he had claimed and to pay a certain sum in capital gains tax.
Held: Where the . .
Cited – Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
Cited – The United Policyholders Group and Others v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 28-Jun-2016
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellants, all residents of Trinidad and Tobago, held life policies issued by the Colonial Life Insurance Company (CLICO). Their claim arose out of the banking crisis in early 2009 when CLICO was in serious financial . .
Cited – Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service HL 22-Nov-1984
Exercise of Prerogative Power is Reviewable
The House considered an executive decision made pursuant to powers conferred by a prerogative order. The Minister had ordered employees at GCHQ not to be members of trades unions.
Held: The exercise of a prerogative power of a public nature . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.615570

Crest Nicholson Plc v Office of Fair Trading: Admn 24 Jul 2009

The company challenged as unfair its treatment by the respondent in imposing fines for anti-competive behaviour. The claimant was successor of the company who had misbehaved, but the claimant no longer operated in the area and had no employees from that era. It said that the respondent had resiled on a leniency agreement as to its treatment. The respondent had investigated systems of co-ordinated cover pricing in quotations for public works, and found that the volume of material was too large to process properly. It made a fast track offer intended to result in a reduced penalty.
Held: The OFT had acted unfairly in not acknowledging the difference in the position of the claimant Seeking ‘blind admissions to what are said to be infringements of the law is in breach of the principle of fairness.’ ‘Undertaking’ in competition law is an economic concept which is not equivalent to a traditional corporate entity. An undertaking may include a group of companies so long as that group of companies acts as a single economic unit.
‘the OFT must comply with the principle of equal treatment in all steps leading up to the imposition of a penalty’
Cranston J
[2009] EWHC 1875 (Admin)
Bailii
Competition Act 1998 (Office of Fair Trading’s Rules) Order 2004, Competition Act 1998
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Akzo Nobel and Others v Commission (Competition) ECFI 12-Dec-2007
ECJ Competition Cartels in the vitamin products sector Choline chloride (Vitamin B4) Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area Attributability . .
Cited – Itochu v Commission (Competition) ECFI 30-Apr-2009
ECJ Competition Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market for video games consoles and games cartridges compatible with Nintendo games consoles – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – . .
Cited – Office of Communications and Another v Floe Telecom Ltd CA 15-Jun-2006
The Competition Appeal Tribunal had remitted a matter to the Office of Fair Trading and had set a time limit for the Commisioner to complete his investigation. The Office appealed.
Held: It was not within the CAT’s power, under either the . .
Cited – Automec SRL v Commission ECFI 18-Sep-1992
Europa Among the civil-law consequences which an infringement of the prohibition laid down in Article 85(1) of the Treaty may have, only one is expressly provided for in Article 85(2), namely the nullity of the . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody and Others HL 25-Jun-1993
A mandatory lifer is to be permitted to suggest the period of actual sentence to be served. The Home Secretary must give reasons for refusing a lifer’s release. What fairness requires in any particular case is ‘essentially an intuitive judgment’, . .

Cited by:
Cited – Gallaher Group Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Competition and Markets Authority SC 16-May-2018
Extent and consequences of duties of ‘equal treatment’ or ‘fairness’, said to have been owed by the Office of Fair Trading to those subject to investigation under the Competition Act 1998. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.361461

Norwich and Peterborough Building Society, Regina (on the Application of) v Financial Ombudsman Service Ltd: Admn 14 Nov 2002

The Ombudsman had found that the applicant had unfairly failed to notify its customers of the availability of better accounts, once it discontinued accounts of one type. The Society appealed saying that the finding of unfairness arose from matters outside the scope of the Code.
Held: The finding did go outside the strict range of the Code. Nevertheless, the code was to be interpreted in a purposive, and non-technical way, and the Ombudsman had some considerable discretion. There were arguments each way as to the fairness or unfairness of the decision, but the court could only intervene if the decision was so bad as to be irrational. That was not the case here.
Times 13-Dec-2002, [2002] EWHC 2379 (Admin)
Bailii
Banking Code 1998
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Monopolies and Mergers Commission, ex parte South Yorkshire Transport Ltd HL 1993
One bus company took over another, giving it an effective monopoly within the region. The Commission considered that the area involved was sufficiently substantial to cause concern that it may operate against the public interest. At first instance . .
Cited – Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Passenger Rail Franchising, Ex Parte Save Our Railways and Others Etc CA 18-Dec-1995
A requirement that new services should be ‘based upon’ the present timetables did not mean that the services had to be at same level. It was possible that they may be a lesser service, though there should be no significant departures from such . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 June 2021; Ref: scu.178117

Trioplast Industrier v Commission: ECJ 20 Dec 2017

Competition – Agreements, Decisions and Concerted Practices Competition – Appeal – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market in industrial plastic bags – Formal notice from the European Commission to the appellant for the payment of default interest on the amount of the fine imposed – Action for annulment and for damages
C-364/16, [2017] EUECJ C-364/16P
Bailii
European

Updated: 01 June 2021; Ref: scu.602117

CFC 26 Ltd v Brown Shipley and Co Ltd and Others: ChD 29 Nov 2016

Complaint of the alleged sale of an underlease at a low price, working as a corrupt agreement. It was said that one of the defendants, a local council, was liable for malicious prosecution of an enforcement notice. The Council’s replied that the tort ‘cannot apply in relation to the mere service of an enforcement notice’ because, as it is put in Clerk and Lindsell: ‘To prosecute is to set the law in motion and the law is only set in motion by an appeal to some person clothed with judicial authority in regard to the matter in question.’ The Council argued that the service of an enforcement notice involved no ‘appeal to some person clothed in judicial authority’
Held: Neey J said: ‘In my view, [Counsel for the Council] is right on this point. While it is now clear that the tort of malicious prosecution can apply without a criminal prosecution, there remains a requirement that the law has been ‘set in motion by an appeal to some person clothed with judicial authority’ and service of an enforcement notice cannot, as it seems to me, suffice for this purpose. I do not see Churchill v Siggers as providing authority to the contrary.’
Newey J
[2016] EWHC 3048 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – CXZ v ZXC QBD 26-Jun-2020
Malicious Prosecution needs court involvement
W had made false allegations against her husband of child sex abuse to police. He sued in malicious prosecution. She applied to strike out, and he replied saying that as a developing area of law a strike out was inappropriate.
Held: The claim . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 May 2021; Ref: scu.571982

Archer Daniels Midland v Commission (Competition): ECJ 15 May 2008

EU (Opinion) Appeal Competition Article 81 EC Cartel Sodium gluconate market Regulation No 17 Fines Guidelines on the method of setting fines Statement of reasons demonstrating the need to increase the level of fines EEA-wide product turnover Principle of equal treatment Determination of market impact Burden of pleading and proving the facts Duration of the infringement and termination of the cartel Attenuating circumstances.
C-510/06, [2008] EUECJ C-510/06 – O
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Opinion – Archer Daniels Midland v Commission (Competition) ECJ 19-Mar-2009
Appeal – Competition Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Sodium gluconate market – Fines – Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Community competition policy – Equal treatment – Turnover to be taken into account – Attenuating . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 May 2021; Ref: scu.267958

European Commission v Tomkins Plc: ECJ 19 Jul 2012

C-286/11, [2012] EUECJ C-286/11
Bailii
European
Cited by:
See Also – European Commission v Tomkins Plc 22-Jan-2013
Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – European market for copper and copper alloy fittings – Liability of the parent company stemming solely from the unlawful conduct of its subsidiary – Principle of ‘ne ultra petita’ – . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 April 2021; Ref: scu.463837

Imperial Chemical Industries v Commission: ECFI 5 Jun 2012

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Methacrylates market – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Participation in a part of the cartel – Rights of the defence – Fines – Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based – Gravity of the infringement – Deterrent effect – Equal treatment – Proportionality – Principle of sound administration – Cooperation during the administrative procedure – Duration of procedure – Reasonable time
Czucz P
T-214/06, [2012] EUECJ T-214/06
Bailii

Updated: 12 April 2021; Ref: scu.460218

In Re Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete (No 2): CA 8 Jul 1993

An employer was not liable for its employee’s action in contempt of court against the company’s clear instructions with regard to anti-competitive agreements.
Times 08-Jul-1993, Independent 14-Jul-1993
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Director General of Fair Trading v Smiths Concrete: re Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete 1992
For a person to be found in contempt of a court order it is necessary to show that that he knew of the relevant order and with that knowledge he intended to do the act which amounted to a breach of the court order. It is not necessary to show that . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Director General of Fair Trading v Pioneer Concrete (UK) Ltd, sub nom Supply of Ready Mixed Concrete (No 2) HL 25-Nov-1994
The actions of company employees, acting in the course of their employment and in contempt may put the company employer in contempt also, and even though the company may have given explicit instructions that no infringing agreement should be entered . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.82208

Department of Trade and Industry v Cedenio: QBD 22 Mar 2001

The provisions of the Act which required the owner of a business to be identified, were satisfied by the owner of the business signing his name on correspondence. The Act could not be read so as to require the addition of some phrase such as ‘trading as’ Similarly there was no requirement to add an explicit statement that a particular address was an address for service.
Times 22-Mar-2001
Business Names Act 1985 4(1) 4(6)
England and Wales

Updated: 08 April 2021; Ref: scu.79912

The Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd: ChD 16 Nov 2017

The Authority had obtained and executed a search warrant against the defendant’s premises, but now sought to restrain disclosure of the materials upon which it had obtained that warrant, asserting Public Interest Immunity.
Held: An application to vary or revoke the warrant must be at an inter partes rehearing. At that rehearing eh court must rely only upon evidence disclosed to the other side, save that the authority would have liberty to submit an affidavit setting out the gist of any material redacted on public interest immunity grounds before determination of the application.
Marcus Smith J: ‘(i) rejected a submission that, if the CMA was to be permitted to resist the challenge, it must disclose the full material;
(ii) considered that the Supreme Court’s judgment in Al Rawi precluded a ‘closed material procedure’, whereby the material withheld could be seen by the court, but not by Concordia;
(iii) rejected the CMA’s case that some form of confidentiality ring could be established, to allow disclosure to Concordia’s counsel, without disclosure to Concordia; and
(iv) in these circumstances held that ‘Concordia’s application to vary or partially revoke the warrant must be determined on the basis of such material as is not protected by public interest immunity’
Marcus Smith J
[2017] EWHC 2911 (Ch), [2018] Bus LR 367, [2017] WLR(D) 772
Bailii, WLRD
Competition Act 1998 281(1), Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, Competition Act 1998 and Other Enactments (Amendment) Regulations 2004
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd CA 7-Aug-2018
The Authority had obtained a search warrant on an ex parte application. The defendant sought a rehearing, but the Authority sought to rely upon material for which it now asserted public interest immunity in material already used. At first instance, . .
See Also – The Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd ChD 8-Nov-2018
Whether to appoint special advocate. The Authority wished to pursue an investigation relying upon material for which it asserted Public Interest Immunity. . .
See Also – The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd ChD 12-Dec-2018
Challenge to search warrants issued under the 1998 Act. . .
See Also – The Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd ChD 16-Jan-2019
Application to vary search warrant.
Held: Refused. . .
Cited – Haralambous, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Court at St Albans and Another SC 24-Jan-2018
The appellant challenged by review the use of closed material first in the issue of a search warrant, and subsequently to justify the retention of materials removed during the search.
Held: The appeal failed. No express statutory justification . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 April 2021; Ref: scu.599632

Consorzio per la tutela del formaggio Gorgonzola v Kaserei Champignon Hofmeister GmbH and Co KG: ECJ 4 Mar 1999

Upon the registration of a PDO (‘protected designation of origin’) national rules ceased to apply and ‘only the legal rules laid down in the Regulation are, together with the Treaty rules, relevant for the purpose of answering the questions referred about the scope of the protection of the PDO. The protection of the PDO is now guaranteed by Community law.
C-87/97, [1999] ECR I-1301
European
Cited by:
Cited – Consorzio Del Prosciutto Di Parma v Asda Stores Limited and others HL 8-Feb-2001
The name ‘Parma Ham’ was controlled as to its use under Italian law, and the associated mark, the ‘corona ducale’, was to be applied to a sale of Parma Ham, including any packaging. Proper Parma Ham was imported and resold through the defendant’s . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 March 2021; Ref: scu.162066

Editions Jacob v Commission T-471/11: ECFI 24 Nov 2011

(Competition) Merits – Competition – Concentration of undertakings – Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the common market subject to retrocession of assets – Annulment by the General Court of the initial decision concerning the Commission’s approval of the purchaser of the assets retroceded – Application for suspension of operation of the decision on the new approval of the same purchaser – Emergency defect – Balancing of interests
[2011] EUECJ T-471/11
Bailii, Bailii
European
Cited by:
Order – Editions Jacob v Commission T-471/11 ECJ 5-Sep-2014
ECJ Competition – Concentrations – Book publishing market – Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the common market subject to retrocession of assets – Decision approving the acquirer of the assets . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 March 2021; Ref: scu.449359

Cementos Portland Valderrivas v Commission: ECFI 29 Jul 2011

ECFI (Competition) Interim measures – Competition – Enquiry – Article 18, paragraph 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1 / 2003 – Application for stay of execution – Lack of urgency.
T-296/11, [2011] EUECJ T-296/11
Bailii
European
Cited by:
See Also – Cementos Portland Valderrivas v Commission 14-Mar-2014
Competition – Administrative procedure – Request for information decision – Necessary nature of the information requested – Significantly serious evidence – Judicial review – Proportionality . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.444080

Mediaset v Commission (State Aid): ECJ 28 Jul 2011

ECJ Appeal – Subsidies granted by the Italian Republic to promote the purchase of digital decoders – Non-inclusion of decoders for the reception solely of television programmes broadcast by satellite – Decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the common market.
C-403/10, [2011] EUECJ C-403/10
Bailii
European

Updated: 15 March 2021; Ref: scu.442296

Kier Group Plc, Kier Regional Ltd v Office of Fair Trading: CAT 11 Mar 2011

The CAT set ot the decision of the respondent: ‘1 On 21 September 2009 the Office of Fair Trading (‘OFT’) published a decision under the Competition Act 1998 (‘the 1998 Act’) entitled ‘Bid rigging in the construction industry in England’ (‘the Decision’). The Decision is the longest decision ever adopted by the OFT, running to nearly 2,000 pages. It followed an extensive investigation which took place over some five and a half years between April 2004 and September 2009 which was by far the largest undertaken by the OFT, in terms of the number of parties involved, the number of inspections made and the number of suspected infringements.
2 In the Decision the OFT found that, in the period 2000 to 2006, 103 undertakings had each committed between one and three infringements of the prohibition contained in section 2 of the 1998 Act (‘the Chapter I Prohibition’). That prohibition applies to agreements or concerted practices which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the United Kingdom.
3 By far the majority of those infringements consisted of what can perhaps be referred to as ‘simple’ cover pricing, to distinguish them from the six infringements described at paragraph 21 below. ‘Simple’ cover pricing occurs where one of those invited to tender for a construction contract (Company A) does not wish to win the contract, but does not want to indicate its lack of interest to the client, for whose work it may wish to be invited to tender in the future. Company A therefore seeks a cover price from another company which is tendering for that contract (Company B). Company B will be seeking to win the contract and will have reached a view as to its own tender price. Indeed it may already have submitted its own tender to the client. The cover price which it provides to Company A will be at a level sufficiently high to ensure that Company A does not win. This price is submitted to the client by Company A as though it is a genuine tender. It should be noted that Company B does not reveal its own tender price to Company A – the cover price is an inflated price.
4 The OFT imposed penalties totalling approximately andpound;129.2m in respect of 199 infringements.’
[2011] CAT 3
Bailii

Updated: 13 March 2021; Ref: scu.441647

Deutsche Bahn Ag and Others v Morgan Crucible Company Plc and Others: CAT 25 May 2011

Marcus Smith QC, Mrs Margot Daly and Mr Dermot Glynn
[2011] CAT 16, [2011] Comp AR 569
Bailii
Cited by:
Appeal From – Deutsche Bahn Ag and Others v Morgan Crucible Company Plc and Others CA 31-Jul-2012
The respondent company (MC) had disclosed to the European Commission its own historical involvement in unlawful price-fixing cartels. Other members, but not MC received fines. The claimants (DB) sought damages for their losses arising from the . .
At CAT – Deutsche Bahn Ag and Others v Morgan Advanced Materials Plc SC 9-Apr-2014
The Court was asked whether claims against MAM for losses suffered by reason of a cartel infringing article 81(1) TEC (now article 101 TFEU) were time-barred, and also as to substantive questions about the nature of the decisions of the European . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 March 2021; Ref: scu.441655

Solvay Solexis v Commission: ECFI 16 Jun 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements – Hydrogen peroxide and sodium perborate – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Duration of the infringement – Meaning of’accord ‘and’ concerted practice ‘- Access to the file – Fines – Equal treatment – Leniency Notice – Duty to state reasons.
T-195/06, [2011] EUECJ T-195/06
Bailii
European

Updated: 13 March 2021; Ref: scu.441192

Solvay v Commission T-186/06: ECFI 16 Jun 2011

ECJ Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Hydrogen peroxide and sodium perborate – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Duration of the infringement – Concepts of ‘agreement’ and ‘concerted practice’ – Access to the file – Fines – Leniency Notice – Equal treatment – Legitimate expectations – Obligation to state the reasons on which the decision is based.
[2011] EUECJ T-186/06
Bailii
European

Updated: 13 March 2021; Ref: scu.441193

Proas v Commission: ECJ 9 Jun 2016

(Judgment) Appeal – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Article 81 EC – Spanish market for penetration bitumen – Market sharing and price coordination – Excessive duration of the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union – Excessive duration of the procedure before the European Commission – Appeal on the cost
ECLI:EU:C:2016:415, [2016] EUECJ C-616/13
Bailii
European

Updated: 08 March 2021; Ref: scu.565630

European Night Services v Commission T-388/94: ECFI 15 Sep 1998

ECFI Competition – Transport by rail – Agreements on overnight rail services through the Channel Tunnel – Restrictions on competition – Directive 91/440/EEC – Appreciable effect on trade – Supply of necessary services – ‘Essential facilities – Statement of reasons – Admissibility.
[1998] EUECJ T-388/94
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 March 2021; Ref: scu.433444

European Night Services v Commission T-375/94: ECFI 15 Sep 1998

ECFI Competition – Transport by rail – Agreements on overnight rail services through the Channel Tunnel – Restrictions on competition – Directive 91/440/EEC – Appreciable effect on trade – Supply of necessary services – ‘Essential facilities’ – Statement of reasons – Admissibility.
T-375/94, [1998] EUECJ T-375/94
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 March 2021; Ref: scu.433442

Solvay v Commission C-109/10: ECJ 14 Apr 2011

ECJ Appeals – Competition – Abuse of a dominant position (Article 82 EC) – Fidelity rebate – Discrimination against business partners – Rights of the defence – Access to the file – Loss of documents in the administrative procedure – Right to a hearing – Prohibition on the use of evidence (Article 20(1) of Regulation No 17) – Right to have a matter adjudicated upon within a reasonable time – Excessive length of the proceedings – European market for soda ash.
[2011] EUECJ C-109/10
Bailii
European
Cited by:
See Also – Solvay v Commission C-109/10 ECJ 25-Oct-2011
Appeal – Competition – Market in soda ash in the Community – Abuse of dominant position – Infringement of the rights of the defence – Access to the file – Hearing of the undertaking . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 March 2021; Ref: scu.433407

Solvay v Commission C-110/10: ECJ 14 Apr 2011

ECJ Appeal – Competition – Agreements (Article 81 EC) – Rights of the defense – Right of access to the file – Loss of information in the file – Right to be Heard – Principle of reasonable time – Excessive length of proceedings – European Markets soda.
[2011] EUECJ C-110/10
Bailii
European
Cited by:
See Also – Solvay v Commission C-110/10 ECJ 25-Oct-2011
ECJ Appeal – Competition – Market in soda ash in the Community – Concerted practice – Infringement of the rights of the defence – Access to the file – Hearing of the undertaking . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 March 2021; Ref: scu.433408

Council v Interpipe Niko Tube And Interpipe Ntrp C-200/09: ECJ 14 Apr 2011

ECJ Appeal – Common commercial policy – Dumping – Regulation (EC) No 384/96 – Articles 2(10), 3(2), 18(3) and 19(3) – Comparison of the normal value and the export price – Adjustment – Rights of the defence – Imports of certain seamless tubes and pipes, of iron or steel, originating in Croatia, Romania, Russia and Ukraine – Regulation (EC) No 954/2006 – Cooperation by the European Union industry – Use of confidential information.
[2011] EUECJ C-200/09
Bailii
European

Updated: 07 March 2021; Ref: scu.433387

IMI And Others v Commission: ECFI 24 Mar 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Copper and copper alloy fittings sector – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Fines – Relevant turnover – Leniency Notice – Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Equal treatment.
T-378/06, [2011] EUECJ T-378/06
Bailii

Updated: 06 March 2021; Ref: scu.431356

Fra.Bo v Commission: ECFI 24 Mar 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Copper and copper alloy fittings sector – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Fines – Leniency Notice – Guidelines on the method of setting fines – Attenuating circumstances – Immunity from fines – Legitimate expectations – Equal treatment.
T-381/06, [2011] EUECJ T-381/06
Bailii

Updated: 06 March 2021; Ref: scu.431352

IBP And International Building Products France v Commission: ECFI 24 Mar 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Copper and copper alloy fittings sector – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Duration of participation in the infringement – Fines – Aggravating circumstances.
T-384/06, [2011] EUECJ T-384/06
Bailii

Updated: 06 March 2021; Ref: scu.431355

Comap v Commission: ECFI 24 Mar 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Copper and copper alloy fittings sector – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Duration of participation in the infringement – Fines – Determination of the starting amount of the fine – Proportionality.
T-377/06, [2011] EUECJ T-377/06
Bailii

Updated: 06 March 2021; Ref: scu.431340

Siemens and Va Tech Transmission and Distribution v Commission T-124/07: ECFI 3 Mar 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market in gas insulated switchgear projects – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Market-sharing – Effects within the common market – Notion of continuous infringement – Duration of the infringement – Limitation period – Fines – Proportionality – Ceiling of 10% of turnover – Joint and several liability for payment of a fine – Mitigating circumstances – Cooperation – Rights of the defence.
[2011] EUECJ T-124/07
Bailii
European

Updated: 05 March 2021; Ref: scu.430345

Siemens and Va Tech Transmission and Distribution v Commission T-122/07: ECFI 3 Mar 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market in gas insulated switchgear projects – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Market-sharing – Effects within the common market – Notion of continuous infringement – Duration of the infringement – Limitation period – Fines – Proportionality – Ceiling of 10% of turnover – Joint and several liability for payment of a fine – Mitigating circumstances – Cooperation – Rights of the defence.
[2011] EUECJ T-122/07
Bailii
European

Updated: 05 March 2021; Ref: scu.430343

Areva and Others v Commission T-121/07: ECFI 3 Mar 2011

ECFI Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Market in gas insulated switchgear projects – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement – Rights of the defence – Duty to state the reasons on which the decision is based – Whether answerable for the infringement – Duration of the infringement – Fines – Joint and several liability for payment of a fine – Aggravating circumstances – Role of leader – Mitigating circumstances – Cooperation.
[2011] EUECJ T-121/07
Bailii
European

Updated: 05 March 2021; Ref: scu.430327

Elf Aquitaine v Commission: ECJ 17 Feb 2011

ECJ (Competition) Appeal – Cartels – European monochloroacetic acid – Rules relating to the accountability of anticompetitive practices of a subsidiary to its parent – the presumption of innocence and personality of penalties – Defence rights – Duty motivation.
C-521/09, [2011] EUECJ C-521/09
Bailii
European
Cited by:
See Also – Elf Aquitaine v Commission ECJ 29-Sep-2011
ECJ Appeal – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Articles 81 EC and 53 of the EEA Agreement – Monochloroacetic acid market – Rules on the imputability of anti-competitive practices by a subsidiary to . .
See Also – Elf Aquitaine v Commission ECJ 1-Oct-2013
Taxation of costs . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 March 2021; Ref: scu.430205

KME Germany and Others v Commission: ECJ 10 Feb 2011

ECJ Appeal – Competition – Price-fixing and market-sharing cartel – Factors taken into account in fixing fines – Scope of jurisdiction of the General Court – Effective judicial review.
C-272/09, [2011] EUECJ C-272/09 – O, [2011] EUECJ C-272/09 – P – O, [2011] EUECJ C-272/09 – P
Bailii, Bailii, Bailii
European

Updated: 05 March 2021; Ref: scu.430212

Servaas Inc v Rafidain Bank and Others: ChD 14 Dec 2010

Application for third party debt order.
Arnold J
[2010] EWHC 3287 (Ch)
Bailii
State Immunity Act 1978 13(4)
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Servaas Incorporated v Rafidain Bank and Others ComC 14-Dec-2010
The claimant had supplied a factory to Iraq, but remained unpaid. Assets had been frozen in the respondent Iraqi bank, and with the new government, the liquidators were to pay assets to a fund who were, in turn to discharge debts pro rata. The . .
At Administrative Court – SerVaas Incorporated v Rafidian Bank and Others SC 17-Aug-2012
The appellant had contracted to construct a factory in Iraq. On the imposition of sanctions, the respondent bank’s assets were frozen. The appellant sought to recover the sums due to it, and obtained judgment in France. After the fall of Hussain, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 March 2021; Ref: scu.427407

Confederation europeenne des associations d’horlogers-reparateurs (CEAHR) v Commission (Competition): ECFI 15 Dec 2010

ECFI Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Abuse of dominant position – Refusal of Swiss watch producers to supply spare parts to independent watch repairers – Community interest – Relevant market – Primary market and after market – Duty to give reasons – Manifest error of assessment.
T-427/08, [2010] EUECJ T-427/08
Bailii
European

Updated: 03 March 2021; Ref: scu.427315

Enterprise Inns Plc v The Forest Hill Tavern Public House Ltd and Others: ChD 21 Oct 2010

The defendants, tied tenants of the claimant, sought to defend applications for forfeiture of their leases saying that the claimant’s terms and beer prices were not set in good faith at reasonably competitive levels.
[2010] EWHC 2368 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 28 February 2021; Ref: scu.425382

Editions Jacob v Commission: ECFI 13 Sep 2010

ECFI Competition – Concentrations – Edition Francophone – Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the common market provided that repayments of assets – Action for annulment of a prospective buyer not made – obligation to state reasons – Fraud – Error of law – Manifest error of assessment – Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89.
T-279/04, [2010] EUECJ T-279/04
Bailii
European

Updated: 28 February 2021; Ref: scu.424168

Trioplast Wittenheim v Commission (Competition): ECFI 13 Sep 2010

ECFI Competition – Cartels – industrial plastic bags – Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC – Duration of the infringement – Fines – Gravity of the infringement – Attenuating circumstances – Cooperation during the administrative procedure – Proportionality.
T-26/06, [2010] EUECJ T-26/06
Bailii

Updated: 28 February 2021; Ref: scu.424197

France v Commission T-444/04: ECFI 21 May 2010

ECJ State aid – Financial measures for France Telecom – Project shareholder loan – Public statements by a member of the French government – Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market and not ordering its recovery – Action for annulment – Interest in bringing proceedings – Admissibility – Concept of State aid – Advantage Resources – State – Obligation to state reasons.
T-444/04, [2010] EUECJ T-444/04
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 February 2021; Ref: scu.416423

France v Commission (State Aid) French Text: ECFI 21 May 2010

ECJ State aid – Financial measures for France Telecom – Project shareholder loan – Public statements by a member of the French government – Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market and not ordering its recovery – Action for annulment – Interest in bringing proceedings – Admissibility – Concept of State aid – Advantage Resources – State – Obligation to state reasons.
T-450/04, [2010] EUECJ T-450/04
Bailii
European

Updated: 25 February 2021; Ref: scu.416424

France v Commission – T-425/04: ECFI 21 May 2010

ECJ State aid – Financial measures for France Telecom – Project shareholder loan – Public statements by a member of the French government – Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market and not ordering its recovery – Action for annulment – Interest in bringing proceedings – Admissibility – Concept of State aid – Advantage Resources – State – Obligation to state reasons.
T-425/04, [2010] EUECJ T-425/04
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – France v Commission – T-425/04 ECJ 2-Jul-2015
ECJ State aid – Financial measures in favor of France Telecom – Offer for shareholder advance – State declarations by the French State – Decision declaring aid incompatible with the common market – No extension . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 February 2021; Ref: scu.416422

Sel-Imperial Ltd v The British Standards Institution: ChD 23 Apr 2010

The defendant had developed a draft standard for automotive body repairs. It included a requirement that any replacement parts must be either the manufacturer’s own or certified under a recognised conformity certification scheme. The claimant imported so-called ‘replica parts’ and said that the costs of such a scheme would be so disproportionate as to destroy their business. It said that this might be appropriate for safety related parts, but the defendant’s definition of such was too wide, and the scheme was in breach of the 1988 Act. The defendant asked that the claim be struck out.
Held: The court could not conclude that repairers would not feel bound by the standard so as to infringe the claimant’s rights. Limited parts of the particulars were struck out, but the rest should proceed. The court considered the guidelines in Santolino adding that for ‘competition law claims (or defences), that where the area of law is in the course of development the court should be cautious ‘to assume that it is beyond argument with real prospect of success that the existing case law will not be extended or modified’ so as to encompass the basis of argument advanced.’
The issue depends upon a careful analysis of the specific allegation and the facts then relied upon. The essence of Article 101, as applied to horizontal agreements, is to prohibit the substitution of co-ordinated action between competitors for the independent policy that each would otherwise pursue.
Roth J
[2010] EWHC 854 (Ch)
Bailii
Competition Act 1998
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Nigeria v Santolina Investment Corp and others ChD 7-Mar-2007
The federal government sought to recover properties from the defendants which it said were the proceeds of corrupt behaviour by the principal defendant who had been State Governor of a province. The claimant sought summary judgment.
Held: . .
Cited – Bayer AG v Commission (Rec 2000,p II-3383) ECFI 26-Oct-2000
The Commission had found that Bayer’s policy of restricting parallel imports of its pharmaceutical drug, ADALAT, constituted part of its dealership agreements, and had annuled them.
Held: Although Bayer clearly intended to restrict parallel . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Intel Corporation v Via Technologies Inc, Elitegroup Computer Systems (UK) Ltd Via Technologies Inc , Via Technologies (Europe) Ltd, Realtime Distribution Ltd CA 20-Dec-2002
Infringement of patents.
Held: With regard in particular to competition law claims (or defences), where the area of law is in the course of development the court should be cautious ‘to assume that it is beyond argument with real prospect of . .
Cited – Bundesverband Der Arzneimittel-Importeure v Bayer And Commission ECJ 6-Jan-2004
EU (Competition) Appeals – Competition – Parallel imports – Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) – Meaning of agreement between undertakings – Proof of the existence of an agreement – Market in . .
Cited – Bundesverband der Arzneimittel-Importeure eV and Commission of the European Communities v Bayer AG ECJ 6-Jan-2004
Europa Appeals – Competition – Parallel imports – Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) – Meaning of agreement between undertakings – Proof of the existence of an agreement – Market in . .
Cited – BHB Enterprises Plc v Victor Chandler (International) Ltd ChD 27-May-2005
The claimant created a very substantial computerised database about horses and the racing industry. It licensed the database to users, including some who were able to grant sub-licenses. It sought to rely on the Database Directive to support its . .
Cited – Doncaster Pharmaceuticals Group Ltd and Others v The Bolton Pharmaceutical Company 100 Ltd CA 26-May-2006
Appeals were made against interlocutory injunctions for alleged trade mark infringement.
Held: The court should hesitate about making a final decision for summary judgment without a trial, even where there is no obvious conflict of fact at the . .
Cited – Unipart Group Ltd v O2 (UK) Ltd and Another CA 30-Jul-2004
The court considered the applicability of Article 81 in Chapter 1 of Part III of the EC Treaty to allegedly anti-competitive conduct in the market for the wholesale supply of airtime for mobile telephones. Unipart, an independent service provider . .
Cited – General Motors Nederland and Opel Nederland v Commission (Judgment) ECFI 21-Oct-2003
Europa Agreements between Opel’s national sales company in Holland and its authorised dealers were challenged as infringing competition law. The Commission had found that the agreements incorporated Opel’s policy . .
Cited – Suiker Unie and Others v Commission ECJ 16-Dec-1975
. .
Cited – AC-Treuhand v Commission (Competition) ECFI 8-Jul-2008
Europa Competition Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Organic peroxides – Fines – Article 81 EC – Rights of the defence – Right to a fair hearing – Meaning of perpetrator of an infringement – . .

Cited by:
Cited – Humber Oil Terminals Trustee Ltd v Associated British Ports ChD 24-Feb-2011
The claimant sought to renew its leases of docking facilities from the landlord defendant. The defendant resisted saying it intended to operate its own business, and the claimant now alleged that the defendant was abusing its dominant position to . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 February 2021; Ref: scu.408671

BCL Old Co Ltd and others v Basf Se and Others: CA 12 Nov 2010

Maurice Kay LJ VP, Lloyd LJ, Sullivan LJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 1258, [2011] Bus LR 428, [2011] CP Rep 11
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – BCL Old Co Ltd and others v Aventis Sa and others CAT 28-Jan-2005
Applications for security for costs. . .
See Also – BCL Old Co Ltd and others v Basf Se and others CAT 25-Sep-2008
The claimant sought damages after the defendants had been found to be part of an unlawful price maintenance cartel. The respondent argued that the claim was out of time.
Held: The claim could proceed. . .
See Also – BCL Old Co Ltd v Basf Se CAT 17-Oct-2008
The Tribunal unanimously decided that ‘the relevant date’ under rule 31(2) of the Tribunal Rules for the purposes of the Claimants’ claim fell on the expiry of the period during which an appeal against the relevant judgment of the CFI could have . .
See Also – BCL Old Co Ltd and Others v BASF Se and Others CA 22-May-2009
The claimant sought to bring an action for damages arising from an alleged breach of competition rules by the defendant. The defendant argued that the claim was out of time being outside the two year period required.
Held: The respondent’s . .
See Also – BCL Old Co Ltd and Others Basf Se (Formerly Basf Ag) and Others CAT 19-Nov-2009
The claimants wished to claim damages arising from the participation by the defendants in an unlawful cartel. The Court of Appeal had said that the claim was out of time, and that the claimants would have to seek an extension of time to bring their . .
See Also – BCL Old Co Ltd and Others v BASF Se (Formerly BASF Ag) and Others CAT 12-Feb-2010
. .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 February 2021; Ref: scu.425946

Safeway Stores Ltd and Others v Twigger and Others: ComC 15 Jan 2010

Flaux J
[2010] EWHC 11 (Comm)
Bailii
Competition Act 1998 2(1)
Cited by:
Appeal from – Safeway Stores Ltd and Others v Twigger and Others CA 21-Dec-2010
The court was asked whether, when a company had been fined for anti-competitive practices, the company could then recover the penalties from the directors and senior employees involved.
Held: The undertaking was not entitled to recover the . .
Cited – Les Laboratoires Servier and Another v Apotex Inc and Others SC 29-Oct-2014
Ex turpi causa explained
The parties had disputed the validity a patent and the production of infringing preparations. The english patent had failed and damages were to be awarded, but a Canadian patent remained the defendant now challenged the calculation of damages for . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 February 2021; Ref: scu.392914