Case‑376/20 P, CK Telecoms: Tetra Laval Survives, But The Legal Test For Non-Coordinated Effects Will Have To Wait
By: Pablo Ibañez Colomo (Chillin Competition)
There will be no revolution in EU merger control after all. Today’s judgment in CK Telecoms sets aside the first instance ruling. However, it does so in a way that does not depart from Tetra Laval and the prevailing understanding of, inter alia, the principles governing the review of Commission decisions and the applicable standard of proof.
A close reading of the judgment shows that much of the appeal is about the specifics of the decision. The idea that the General Court ‘distorted‘ the Comission’s analysis pervades the ruling, and comes across as an element that must have been central to the outcome of the case. This post, as usual, will not focus on these specifics, but on the issues of principle addressed by the Court.
The most salient aspects of the judgment, which I examine in detail, can be summarised as follows:
- First, the General Court erred in law when setting the applicable standard of proof. ‘Strong probability’ sets the bar too high, the ECJ holds.
- Second, the ‘marginal review’ doctrine only applies to the legal characterisation of facts and only in relation economic assessments (para 124).
- Third, the General Court erred in law when laying down the conditions under which non-coordinated effects can arise absent dominance (and, similarly, by failing to take into account the full range of factors).
- Fourth, the General Court erred in law when defining the notion of ‘closeness of competiton’ and ‘important competitive force’.
Featured News
Nvidia and Microsoft Sued for Allegedly Undercutting AI Technology Patent Prices
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
White & Case Strengthens Antitrust and M&A Practices with New Partner Additions
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Judge Dismisses Antitrust Lawyers’ Fee Demand Over JetBlue-Spirit Deal
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
Boston Landlords Named as US Sues RealPage Over Alleged Rent-Inflating Practices
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
Judge to Weigh Landmark NCAA Settlement Proposal in Antitrust Lawsuit
Sep 5, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Canada & Mexico
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Competitive Convergence: Mexico’s 30-Year Quest for Antitrust Parity with its Northern Neighbor
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Competition and Digital Markets in North America: A Comparative Study of Antitrust Investigations in Mexico and the United States
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
Recent Antitrust Development in Mexico: COFECE’s Preliminary Report on Amazon and Mercado Libre
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI
The Cost of Making COFECE Disappear
Sep 3, 2024 by
CPI