Relaxing whilst doing Competition Law is not an Oxymoron

Archive for May 27th, 2010


with 3 comments

Article 15(2) of Regulation 1/2003 requires Member States to forward to the Commission a copy of any written judgment of national Courts deciding on the application of  Articles 101 or 102 TFEU. These judgments must be sent “without delay after the full written judgment is notified to the parties”.

Since the entry into force of Regulation 1, the Commission has published a database of the judgments it has received from the Member States. A year ago, during the review of the functioning of Regulation 1, stakeholders have criticized the database, as “far from complete“. The Commission has itself acknowldedged that “overall, options for ensuring a more efficient and effective way of providing access to national court judgments should be contemplated” (§291 of Commission Staff Working Paper, Report on the functioning of Regulation 1/2003 {COM(2009)206 final}).

I checked the database today. “Far from complete” exhibits a flavour of euphemism. The most recent Belgian judgments in the database date back to 2007. In France, it seems Courts have not ruled on Articles 101 and 102 TFEU since 2008. In the UK, the Courts have not dealt with EU competition rules since 2005…

Very unsatisfactory, and probably one of the most blatant failures of Regulation 1. I thought I would just help in publishing here a judgment of 6 May 2010, handed down by the Brussels Court of Appeal in  a margin squeeze case. See below.

Arrêt Cour d’appel 6 mai 2010 Belgacom Mobile KPN

Written by Nicolas Petit

27 May 2010 at 10:01 pm

Posted in Case-Law