Reports of Cases

2009 I-04529

Subject-matter

Interpretation of Article 81 EC – Concerted practices – Need for a causal link between the concerted action and the undertakings' conduct on the market – Whether or not to be assessed under rules of national law – Sufficiency of one instance of concerted action or need for regular concerted action over a lengthy period

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 : paragraphs 47, 49, 50
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P1 : paragraphs 22, 28, 29, 36, 43 - 46, 48, 51 - 54, 56, 58
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P1LA : paragraph 37
• Regulation 1/2003 -A02 : paragraph 4
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03P1 : paragraph 5
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03P2 : paragraph 5
• Regulation 1/2003 -C5 : paragraph 3
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/64 : paragraph 29
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/65 : paragraph 28
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -40/73 : paragraphs 26, 32, 33
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -172/80 : paragraphs 32, 33
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -96/82 : paragraph 27
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -89/85 : paragraphs 26, 32
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -49/92 : paragraphs 23, 55, 56
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -199/92 : paragraphs 51, 58
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/95 : paragraphs 32 - 35
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -126/97 : paragraph 49
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -194/99 : paragraph 35
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -105/04 : paragraph 29
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -295/04 : paragraph 49
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -209/07 : paragraphs 27, 28, 29

Operative part

• Interprets : EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P1

Opinion

• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 3 -P1LG : points 58, 71
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 : points 2, 7, 22, 27, 28, 44, 58, 70, 71, 76, 79, 80, 83, 85 - 88, 92, 94, 109
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P1 : points 1, 4, 22, 25 - 27, 32, 37, 38, 40, 42, 44 - 47, 57, 60, 66, 72, 74, 77, 109
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P1LA : point 63
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 82 : points 35, 79, 80, 85, 87, 88, 92
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 86 : point 79
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 234 : point 29
  
• Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (1991) -A104P3 : point 29
  
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2000) -A48P1 : point 92
  
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2000) -A51P1 : point 92
  
• Regulation 1/2003 : points 3, 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A02 : points 5, 80, 81
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03 : point 7
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03P1 : points 27, 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03P2 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A05P1T1 : point 44
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A07P1 : point 44
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A11 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A16 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A23P2LA : point 44
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A23P3 : point 107
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A45P2 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C1 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C4 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C5 : points 6, 81, 86
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C6 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C7 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C8 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C14 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C17 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C19 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C21 : point 85
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -C22 : point 85
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/64 : points 39, 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/65 : points 39, 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -24/67 : point 44
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -48/69 : point 66
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -48/69 : points 33, 38, 51
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -52/69 : point 33
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -40/73 : points 33, 52, 70
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -33/76 : point 82
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -19/77 : point 39
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -209/78 : point 69
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -172/80 : points 33, 52, 70
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -96/82 : point 39
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -240/82 : point 69
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -29/83 : points 39, 66
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -123/83 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -89/85 : points 66, 67
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -68/88 : point 84
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -110/88 : points 88, 89
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -49/92 : point 102
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -49/92 : points 33, 38, 42, 44, 52, 70, 74, 75, 78, 90, 91, 99, 100, 103
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -60/92 : points 79, 86
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -199/92 : points 33, 38, 42, 44, 52, 70, 74, 75, 78, 80, 90 - 93, 99, 100
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -235/92 : points 42, 44, 69, 74, 78, 80, 92, 93
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/95 : points 51 - 53, 70
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -185/95 : point 78
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -219/95 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -242/95 : points 77, 79, 82, 86, 88
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -292/97 : point 92
  
• General Court - Judgment T -202/98 : point 101
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -344/98 : point 85
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -194/99 : points 51, 53
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -238/99 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -453/99 : point 82
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -204/00 : points 42, 78, 88, 89, 103
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -2/01 : point 78
  
• General Court - Judgment T -168/01 : point 48
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -230/01 : point 87
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -387/02 : point 84
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -540/03 : point 92
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -540/03 : point 92
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -551/03 : points 39, 51
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -95/04 : points 46, 58
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -105/04 : point 89
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -105/04 : points 42, 74, 88
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -113/04 : point 88
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -212/04 : point 84
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -295/04 : points 82, 107
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/04 : points 78, 88
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -407/04 : point 3
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -407/04 : point 3
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -217/05 : point 26
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -238/05 : points 37, 52, 53, 70
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -303/05 : point 92
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -421/05 : point 82
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -432/05 : point 92
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -280/06 : point 26
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -101/07 : points 42, 78
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -209/07 : points 39, 42, 43, 51
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

• 09/01/2008

Date of the Opinion

• 19/02/2009

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

04/06/2009

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 92 from 12.04.2008, p.11

Judgment: OJ C 180 from 01.08.2009, p.12

Name of the parties

T-Mobile Netherlands and Others

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Debroux, Michel: Chroniques. Ententes, Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2009 nº 2 p.101-102 (FR)
2. Gerbrandy, A. ; Verhoeven, M.J.M.: Administratiefrechtelijke beslissingen ; Rechtspraak bestuursrecht 2009 nº 273 (NL)
3. Sciacovelli, Annita Larissa: Irrilevante l'effetto prodotto dallo scambio di informazioni tra le aziende, Guida al diritto 2009 nº 25 p.104-106 (IT)
4. Broussy, Emmanuelle ; Donnat, Francis ; Lambert, Christian: Chronique de jurisprudence communautaire. Concurrence - Pratique concertée, L'actualité juridique ; droit administratif 2009 p.1539 (FR)
5. Idot, Laurence: Entente et échanges d'informations, Europe 2009 Août-Septembre Comm. nº 323 p.33-34 (FR)
6. Debroux, Michel: Chroniques. Ententes, Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2009 nº 3 p.79-80 (FR)
7. Wilhelm, Pascal ; Provost, Elise: La Cour de justice précise la notion d'objet contenue dans l'article 81 CE et impose le niveau de preuve des pratiques concertées requis, Revue Lamy droit des affaires 2009 nº 41 p.45-49 (FR)
8. Vialens, Jérémie: Gazette du Palais 2009 nº 275-276 I Jur. p.9-11 (FR)
9. Hukkinen, Niko ; Troberg, Maria: Yhdenmukaistettu menettelytapa, tietojenvaihto ja EY:n tuomioistuimen T-Mobile ratkaisu - missä kulkee raja sallittujen ja kiellettyjen kilpailijakontaktien välillä?, Defensor Legis 2009 nº 4 p.678-695 (FI)
10. Schmidt, Jens Peter ; Koyuncu, Adem: Kartellrechtliche Compliance-Anforderungen an den Informationsaustausch zwischen Wettbewerbern, Betriebs-Berater 2009 p.2551-2555 (DE)
11. Van de Hel, J.M.M.: Het antwoord in de mobiele operators zaak: een per se verbod, Actualiteiten mededingingsrecht 2009 p.122-127 (NL)
12. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2009 nº 432 (NL)
13. Angelopoulos, E.: Enarmonismeni praktiki se mia kinisi. Paizoun prota ta kartel, Dikaio Meson Enimerosis & Epikoinonias 2009 p.605-607 (EL)
14. Schroeder, Dirk: Informationsaustausch zwischen Wettbewerbern, Wirtschaft und Wettbewerb 2009 p.718-727 (DE)
15. Idot, Laurence: Droit spécial du contrat. Précisions de la Cour de justice sur les échanges d'informations entre concurrents, Revue des contrats 2009 p.1401-1405 (FR)
16. Loozen, E.M.H.: T-Mobile Netherlands: het Hof schenkt klare wijn over de uitleg van een doelbeperking bij een economische benadering, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2009 p.229-236 (NL)
17. Korsten, L.E.J.: T-Mobile e.a. / NMa, Markt & Mededinging 2009 p.195-201 (NL)
18. Cortés Martín, José Manuel: Jurisprudencia del TJCE, Mayo-Agosto 2009, Revista de Derecho Comunitario Europeo 2009 p.1109-1178 (ES)
19. Loozen, Edith: The application of a more economic approach to restrictions by object: No revolution after all (T-Mobile Netherlands (C-8/08)), European Competition Law Review 2010 p.146-150 (EN)
20. Heijnen-Bos, L. ; Looijestijn-Clearie, A.: S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2010 p.120-124 (NL)
21. Frese, Michael J.: Tightening the Grip on the Application of Article 81 EC Treaty: The European Court of Justice Guards Its Province - Case C-8/08, T-Mobile Netherlands BV et al. v. Raad van bestuur van de Nederlandse Mededingingsautoriteit, Judgment of the European Court of Justice of 4 June 2009, nyr, Legal Issues of Economic Integration 2010 Vol.37 Issue 1 p.87-104 (EN)
22. Gerbrandy, Anna: Case C-8/08, T-Mobile Netherlands BV, KPN Mobile NV, Orange Nederland NV, Vodafone Libertel NV v. Raad van bestuur van de Nederlandse Mededingingsautoriteit, Judgment of the Court of Justice (Third Chamber) of 4 June 2009, nyr, Common Market Law Review 2010 Vol.47 Nº 4 p.1199-1220 (EN)
23. Colangelo, Giuseppe: T-Mobile Netherlands e GaxoSmithKline. La giusrisprudenza comunitaria torna indietro., Mercato concorrenza regole 2010 p.527-531 (IT)
24. Lazǎr, Laura: Jurisprudenţǎ Europeanǎ, Revista română de drept al afacerilor 2010 nº 7 p.124-126 (RO)
25. Korsten, L.E.J.: CBb oordeelt dat NMa onderzoek in zaak mobiele operators deels overnieuw moet doen, Markt & Mededinging 2011 p.32-37 (NL)
26. Szilágyi, Pál: A Holland T-Mobile-ügy - A versenytársak közötti találkozók tilalma, Jogesetek Magyarázata 2011 nº 1 p.66-70 (HU)
27. X: Europees Recht 1963-1979; Jurisprudentie en Annotaties (Ed. Ars Aequi Libri - Utrecht) 2012 p.299-300 (NL)
28. Hautbourg, Stéphane: Un coup d'arrêt à l'approche extensive de la notion de restriction par objet, Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2014 nº 4 p.61 (FR)
29. Sap, Jan Willem ; Smit, Marije: Ars Aequi Jurisprudentie Europeese Recht (3e druk) 2015 p.399-400 (NL)
30. Augagneur, Luc-Marie: Les échanges d'informations sur les marchés agricoles ou le choc des cultures régulatrices dans l'affaire des endives, Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2018 nº 70 p.12-19 (FR)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven - Netherlands

Subject-matter

• Competition
  
• - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
  
• - Concerted practices
  

Provisions of national law referred to

Mededingingswet, art. 1, 6 en 56

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

• Reference for a preliminary ruling
  

Formation of the Court

troisième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Klučka

Advocate General

Kokott

Language(s) of the Case

• Dutch
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• German