30 September 2019

Anticompetitive agreements and abuse of dominant position: Localizing the anticompetitive effect
In order to establish the Commission’s jurisdiction in respect of an infringement committed by undertakings established outside the European Union, it is possible to rely, alternatively – but not cumulatively – on the implementation or the qualified effects test.
GC, Case T-8/16 Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp, Judgment of 12 July 2019, LawLex20190000929JBJ

Anticompetitive agreements and abuse of dominant position: Intermediary
The behavior of a commercial agent working exclusively on behalf of an undertaking without assuming any of the economic risk related to the sale of its products, can be attributed to that undertaking.
GC, Case T-8/16 Toshiba Samsung Storage Technology Corp, Judgment of 12 July 2019, LawLex20190000929JBJ

Commission decision: Statement of reasons
When setting a lump sum basic amount of the fine imposed on an undertaking having facilitated an agreement, the Commission cannot merely state that account had been taken of the gravity and duration of the infringements but must disclose the methodology used to the interested parties.
CJEU, Case C-39/18 NEX International Limited, formerly Icap plc, Judgment of 10 July 2019, LawLex20190000915JBJ

Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments: Place where the harmful event occurred
In an action for compensation for damage caused by a price fixing agreement, the “place where the harmful event occurred” covers the place where the market prices were distorted even where the action is directed against a participant in the cartel with whom that victim had not established contractual relations.
CJEU, Case C-451/18 Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kf, Judgment of 29 July 2019, LawLex20190000991JBJ

Copyright and related rights: Right of reproduction
Article 2(c) of Directive No 2001/29 must, in the light of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that the phonogram producer’s exclusive right under that provision to reproduce and distribute his or her phonogram allows him to prevent another person from taking a sound sample, even if very short, of his or her phonogram for the purposes of including that sample in another phonogram, unless that sample is included in the phonogram in a modified form unrecognizable to the ear.
CJEU, Case C-476/17 Pelham GmbH, Judgment of 29 July 2019, LawLex20190000988JBJ