Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 31 May 2005.

Synetairismos Farmakopoion Aitolias & Akarnanias (Syfait) and Others v GlaxoSmithKline plc and GlaxoSmithKline AEVE.

Reference for a preliminary ruling: Epitropi Antagonismou - Greece.

Admissibility - Meaning of court or tribunal of a Member State - Abuse of a dominant position - Refusal to supply pharmaceutical products to wholesalers - Parallel trade.

Case C-53/03.


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex Autres Liens
Judgment (OJ)
23/07/2005 Syfait and Others
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2005:333
31/05/2005 Syfait and Others
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2005:333
31/05/2005 Syfait and Others
Application (OJ)
26/04/2003 Syfait and Others
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2004:673
28/10/2004 Syfait and Others
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

2005 I-04609

Subject-matter

Interpretation of Article 82 EC ─ Abuse of a dominant position ─ Refusal by a dominant undertaking to meet all orders placed by pharmaceutical wholesalers, with the intention of restricting their export activity and, consequently, of limiting the loss caused by parallel trade.

Systematic classification scheme

1.
B European Community (EEC/EC)
  B-19 Legal proceedings
    B-19.04 Reference for a preliminary ruling
      B-19.04.01 Reference to the Court of Justice
        B-19.04.01.01 Definition of court or tribunal of a Member State


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Operative part

Information not available

Opinion


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 05/02/2003

Date of the Opinion

  • 28/10/2004

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

31/05/2005


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 101 from 26.04.2003, p.18

Judgment: OJ C 182 from 23.07.2005, p.3

Name of the parties

Syfait and Others

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. McCann, Dorit: Syfait v Glaxosmithkline Article 82 and Parallel Trade of Pharmaceuticals, European Competition Law Review 2005 p.373-374 (EN)
  2. Arhel, Pierre: Activité des juridictions communautaires en droit de la concurrence, Revue de la concurrence et de la consommation 2005 nº 143 p.3-4 (FR)
  3. Heide, Thomas ; Domínguez Pérez, Dolores: The ECJ declines to rule in the key Syfait case, Competition Law Insight 2005 Vol. 4 Issue 10 p.3-4 (EN)
  4. Bobek, Michal: Soudní dvůr Evropských společenství: Komise pro hospodářskou soutěž není soudním orgánem ve smyslu článku 234 SES, Soudní rozhledy : mesícník ceské, zahranicní a evropské judikatury : nová soudní rozhodnutí vydávaná redakcí casopisu Právní rozhledy ve spoluprác jednotlivymi soudci 2005 p.354-355 (CS)
  5. X: Gazette du Palais 2005 I Jur. p.28-29 (FR)
  6. Tagaras, Haris ; Waelbroeck, Michel: Les autorités nationales de la concurrence et l'article 234 du traité. Un étrange arrêt de la Cour de justice, Cahiers de droit européen 2005 p.465-492 (FR)
  7. Jalabert-Doury, Nathalie ; Nouvel, Laurent ; Simic, Igor: Affaire Glaxo Grèce: la montagne a accouché d'une souris, Revue de droit des affaires internationales 2005 p. 771-776 (FR)
  8. X: Il Foro italiano 2005 IV Col.440-441 (IT)
  9. Bastianon, Stefano: Il caso "Syfait" e il problema delle importazioni parallele nel settore farmaceutico, Il Foro italiano 2005 IV Col.441-444 (IT)
  10. Gambaro, Edoardo ; Landi, Niccolò: Il diritto industriale 2005 p.485-499 (IT)
  11. Matochová, Soňa: Posouzení soutěžního úřadu jako "soudu" oprávněného položit předběžnou otázku ve smyslu článku 234 SES, EMP Jurisprudence 2005 p.48-50 (CS)
  12. Mento, Sandro: Giornale di diritto amministrativo 2005 p.1277-1284 (IT)
  13. Barbier de La Serre, Éric: Les autorités nationales de concurrence et le renvoi préjudiciel: les enseignements ambigus de l'arrêt Syfait, Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2005 nº 4 p.59-64 (FR)
  14. Decocq, Georges: Revue de jurisprudence commerciale 2005 p.516-526 (FR)
  15. Momège, Chantal: Question préjudicielle - Autorités nationales de concurrence: Par un arrêt de principe, la Cour de justice refuse aux autorités nationales de concurrence le droit de lui poser des questions préjudicielles, Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2005 nº 3 p.116-117 (FR)
  16. Anagnostaras, Georgios: Preliminary problems and jurisdiction uncertainties: the admissibility of questions referred by bodies performing quasi-judicial functions, European Law Review 2005 p.878-890 (EN)
  17. Idot, Laurence: Coopération entre les ANC et le juge communautaire, Europe 2005 Juillet Comm. nº 256 p.23-24 (FR)
  18. Colavecchio, A.: Colpirne uno per educarne cento? Problemi della legittimazione al rinvio pregiudiziale delle autorità indipendenti, Rivista italiana di diritto pubblico comunitario 2005 p. 1867-1906 (IT)
  19. Cienfuegos Mateo, Manuel: Independencia judicial y planteamiento de cuestiones prejudiciales. Comentario a la sentencia Syfait (C-53/03), de 31 de mayo de 2005, del Tribunal de Justicia, Revista General de Derecho Europeo 2005, nº 8, p. 1-21 (ES)
  20. Urlesberger, Franz W.: Gibt es einen gemeinsamen Markt für Arzneien?, Österreichische Blätter für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht 2006 p.4-12 (DE)
  21. Smits, René: On Parallel Trade and Preliminary Issues - a Healthy Approach to Competition Law Enforcement?, Legal Issues of Economic Integration 2006 p.61-83 (EN)
  22. Cienfuegos Mateo, Manuel: Independencia judicial y planteamiento de cuestiones prejudiciales. Comentario a la sentencia Syfait (C-53/03), de 31 de mayo de 2005, del Tribunal de Justicia., Unión Europea Aranzadi 2006 nº 3 p.5-13 (ES)
  23. Albors-Llorens, Albertina: Refusal to Deal and Objective Justification in EC Competition Law, The Cambridge Law Journal 2006 p.24-27 (EN)
  24. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2006 nº 252 (NL)
  25. Colavecchio, Antonio: L'accesso in via pregiudiziale alla Corte di giustizia: porte chiuse per le Autorità indipendenti?, Quaderni costituzionali 2006 p.137-141 (IT)
  26. Arsenidou, Lisa: Parallel trade in drugs. The Hellenic Competition Commission followed Advocate General Jacobs's lead - up to a point, Competition Law Insight 2006 Vol.5 Issue 11 p.7-8 (EN)
  27. Raimondi, Luigi: La nozione di giurisdizione nazionale ex art. 234 TCE alla luce della recente giurisprudenza comunitaria, Il diritto dell'Unione Europea 2006 p.369-405 (IT)
  28. Neruda, Robert: Nad rozsudky soudů ES ve věcech ochrany hospodářské soutěže, Právní zpravodaj : mesícník pro právní praxi 2006 p.12-16 (CS)
  29. Buttazzi, Barbara: La Corte di giustizia esclude l'autorità garante per la concorrenza dal rinvio pregiudiziale, Rivista trimestrale di diritto e procedura civile 2006 p.1017-1033 (IT)
  30. Cavallaro, Maria Cristina: Autorità garanti per la concorrenza e nozione comunitaria di giurisdizione nazionale, Europa e diritto privato 2006 p.825-835 (IT)
  31. Behrens, Peter: Parallelhandel und Konsumentwohlfahrt im Licht des "more economic approach", Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2007 p.97 (DE)
  32. Kolasiński, Marek Krzysztof: Kompetencje do zwracania się do Europejskiego Trybunału Sprawiedliwości z pytaniami dotyczącymi wykładni prawa wspólnotowego, Glosa 2007 Vol. 4 p.42-48 (PL)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Epitropi Antagonismou (Commission de la concurrence) - Greece

Subject-matter

  • Competition
  • - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

Provisions of national law referred to

Information not available

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

  • Reference for a preliminary ruling : dismissal on grounds of inadmissibility

Formation of the Court

grande chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Gulmann

Advocate General

Jacobs

Language(s) of the Case

  • Greek

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • English