20 novembre 2020

Anticompetitive object and effect : Does the recent EU case law bring clarity or fresh doubts ?

Date & lieu

Vendredi 20 novembre 2020 de 15h30 à 17h00 CET

Ajouter au calendrier

Programme

Concurrences, in partnership with Positive Competition and White & Case, is pleased to invite you its next webinar dedicated to the notions of anticompetitive object/effect and the recent ECJ and EU Commission cases.

Luca PRETE | Référendaire, European Court of Justice, Luxembourg [bio]

Xavier BOUTIN | Founding Partner, Positive Competition Brussels [bio]

Estelle JÉGOU | Counsel, White & Case, Paris [bio]

To register, click here

Concurrences Case law comments

1. European Court of Justice, The EU Court of Justice Advocate General Kokott proposes to uphold the fine of almost €94 million imposed on a pharmaceutical group in the context of agreements intended to delay the marketing of generic versions of its antidepressant medicinal product citalopram (Lundbeck), 4 June 2020, e-Competitions June 2020, Art. N° 95290

2. Michel Debroux, Restriction of competition by object : The Court of Justice of the European Union once again attempts to clarify the concept of restriction of competition “by object” (and does not fully succeed) and to provide a pragmatic methodology to identify such restrictions (and does not fully fail) (Gazdasági Versenyhivatal / Budapest Bank Nyrt), 2 April 2020, Concurrences N° 3-2020, Art. N° 96143, pp. 88-90

3. Peter L’Ecluse, The EU Court of Justice rules that pay-for-delay patent settlements may restrict competition ‘by object’ (Generics - UK), 30 January 2020, e-Competitions January 2020, Art. N° 93640

4. Yves Botteman, Camille Keres, The EU Advocate General Bobek publishes his opinion on the concept of restriction of competition by object or by effect (Gazdasági Versenyhivatal / Budapest Bank), 5 September 2019, e-Competitions September 2019, Art. N° 92036

5. Karine Biancone, Restriction by the object : Advocate General Bobek proposes to the European Court of Justice a method for the determination of restriction of competition by object (Gazdasági Versenyhivatal / Budapest Bank), 5 September 2019, Concurrences N° 4-2019, Art. N° 92625, www.concurrences.com

6. Simon Troch, Daphné Van der Eycken, The Advocate General Bobek provides an analytical framework to assess the appropriateness of ‘by object’ qualifications while clarifying and consolidating the case-law on the dichotomy between ‘by object’ and ‘by effect’ restrictions (Budapest Bank), 5 September 2019, e-Competitions September 2019, Art. N° 92640

7. Etienne Thomas, Object or effect : The Court of Justice of the European Union considers that a commercial lease agreement giving a right to the anchor tenant to prevent the lessor from letting commercial premises to third parties is not a restriction of competition by object but may constitute a restriction by effect in case it leads to the closing-off of the market (Maxima Latvija), 26 November 2015, Concurrences N° 1-2016, Art. N° 77696, pp. 81-82

8. James Killick, Jérémie Jourdan, The EU Court of Justice quashes the General Court judgment for failing to correctly apply the notion of restriction by object (Groupement des Cartes Bancaires), 11 September 2014, e-Competitions September 2014, Art. N° 70812

Organisateurs

This event is organised by Concurrences Review and is co-sponsored by legal and/or economic partners. The attendee list will be communicated to the speakers. By registering for this webinar, you are submitting your information to the webinar organisers who will use it to communicate with you regarding this event and their other services. This webinar will be recorded. If your question is selected for the Q&A session, you are consenting to be recorded.

Sponsors