Reports of Cases
published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)
Subject-matter
Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) delivered on 9 September 2010 in Case T155/06 Tomra Systeme ASA and Others v European Commission by which that court dismissed an action for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 29 March 2006 relating to a proceeding under Article 82 of the EC Treaty and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/E-1/38.113 – Prokent/Tomra) imposing a fine of EUR 24 million on the appellants for abusing their dominant position by engaging in practices involving exclusivity agreements, quantity commitments and loyalty rebates in order to prevent or delay the entry of other manufacturers on the market for machines for the collection of used beverage containers in Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden, and, in the alternative, an application for annulment or substantial reduction of the fine.
Systematic classification scheme
1.
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.02 Dominant position
4.08.02.04 Abuse of a dominant position
4.08.02.04.01 Definition of abuse
|
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.02 Dominant position
4.08.02.04 Abuse of a dominant position
4.08.02.04.01 Definition of abuse
|
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.02 Dominant position
4.08.02.04 Abuse of a dominant position
4.08.02.04.01 Definition of abuse
|
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.02 Dominant position
4.08.02.04 Abuse of a dominant position
4.08.02.04.02 Examples of abuse
|
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.02 Dominant position
4.08.02.04 Abuse of a dominant position
4.08.02.04.02 Examples of abuse
|
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.03 Implementation of the competition rules
4.08.03.03 Fines imposed by the Commission
4.08.03.03.04 Fines for infringement of Articles 101 TFEU and 102 TFEU (Articles 81 EC and 82 EC)
4.08.03.03.04.00 General
|
Citations of case-law or legislation
References in grounds of judgment
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 82
: paragraph 21
-
TFEU, Article 102
: paragraphs 17, 24, 38, 39, 46, 68, 69, 72, 74, 79
-
TFEU, Article 256
: paragraph 25
-
TFEU - Protocol No 3
-A58L1 : paragraph 25
-
Regulation 1/2003
: paragraph 105
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -85/76
: paragraph 70
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -100/80
: paragraph 106
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -322/81
: paragraphs 70, 71
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -136/92
: paragraph 99
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -219/95
: paragraph 107
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -280/99
: paragraph 94
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -189/02
: paragraph 105
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -95/04
: paragraphs 18, 69
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -167/04
: paragraph 104
-
General Court - Judgment T -155/06
: paragraphs 1 - 111
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -535/06
: paragraphs 25 - 27
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -125/07
: paragraph 104
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -385/07
: paragraph 47
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -52/09
: paragraphs 17, 38
Operative part
Opinion
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 82
: points 1, 55
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 85
: point 18
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 86
: point 18
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 253
: point 16
-
TFEU, Article 101
: point 18
-
TFEU, Article 102
: points 1, 3 - 5, 9, 17, 18, 28, 37, 40
-
TFEU, Article 256
-P1 : point 6
-
TFEU, Article 296
: point 16
-
TFEU - Protocol No 3
-A58 : point 6
-
Agreement on the European Economic Area
-A54 : points 1, 3, 4
-
Court of Justice - Rules of Procedure (1991)
-A38P1LC : point 81
-
Regulation 1/2003
: point 92
-
Regulation 1/2003
-A23P2 : point 96
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -40/73
: point 88
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -85/76
: points 8, 17, 40, 52, 71, 75, 76, 88
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -100/80
: point 92
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -322/81
: points 52, 88
-
General Court - Judgment T -30/89
: point 88
-
General Court - Judgment T -65/89
: point 88
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -136/92
: points 6, 72
-
General Court - Judgment T -347/94
: point 92
-
General Court - Judgment T -49/95
: point 92
-
General Court - Judgment T -228/97
: point 88
-
General Court - Judgment T -65/98
: point 79
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -163/99
: point 88
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -204/00
: point 65
-
General Court - Judgment T -67/01
: point 93
-
General Court - Judgment T -203/01
: points 40, 42, 52, 55, 88
-
General Court - Judgment T -241/01
: point 92
-
Court of Justice - Order C -481/01
: point 65
-
General Court - Judgment T -52/02
: points 92, 93
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -65/02
: point 65
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -189/02
: points 92, 95
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -551/03
: point 12
-
Court of Justice - Opinion C -95/04
: points 37, 55, 88
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -266/05
: point 16
-
General Court - Judgment T -155/06
: points 1 - 100
-
Court of Justice - Opinion C -280/08
: point 45
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -280/08
: point 45
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -52/09
: point 45
-
General Court - Judgment T -286/09
: point 44
-
Court of Justice - Opinion C -109/10
: points 37, 88
Dates
Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings
Date of the Opinion
Date of the hearing
Information not available
Date of delivery
19/04/2012
References
Publication in the Official Journal
Application: OJ C 63 from 26.02.2011, p.18
Judgment: OJ C 165 from 09.06.2012, p.6
Name of the parties
Tomra and Others v Commission
Notes on Academic Writings
- Idot, Laurence: Abus de position dominante, Europe 2012 Juin Comm. nº 6 p.249 (FR)
- Simon, Stephan ; Zaloguin, Ivan: Das Tomra-Urteil des EuGH - Neues zu Ausschließlichkeitsbindungen unter 102 AEUV?, ÖZK aktuell : Österreichische Zeitschrift für Kartell- und Wettbewerbsrecht 2012 p.115-120 (DE)
- Sibony, Anne-Lise: Accords d’exclusivité - Rabais fidélisant : La CJUE précise la pertinence de l’intention pour la qualification d’abus de position dominante (Tomra), Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2012 nº 3 p.101-104 (FR)
- Van Osch, P.J.H.M.: Terug naar de vorm? Een blik op Tomra, Markt & Mededinging 2012 p.161-164 (NL)
- Idot, Laurence: La Cour de justice précise sa position sur les contrats d'exclusivité et les rabais de fidélité pratiqués par une entreprise en position dominante, Revue des contrats 2012 p.852-855 (FR)
- Fanoy, J.W.: Het Tomra-arrest: kortingen en de "effects based approach"; (vooralsnog) geen gelukkig huwelijk, Actualiteiten mededingingsrecht 2012 p.172-181 (NL)
- Bien, Florian ; Rummel, Per: Ende des More Economic Approach bei der Beurteilung von Rabattsystemen?, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2012 p.737-740 (DE)
- Relange, Mathieul: Des subtilités de la technique du pourvoi, Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2012 nº 32 p.91-92 (FR)
- Braeken, B.J.H.: De beoordeling van kortingen en exclusiviteitsovereenkomsten bij dominante ondernemingen: (nog) geen fundamentele koerswijziging, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2012 p.308-313 (NL)
- Robin, Catherine: Rabais abusifs, Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2012 nº 37 p.22 (FR)
- Robin, Catherine: Rabais abusifs. Il n’est pas nécessaire de comparer les prix pratiqués et les coûts supportés par Tomra pour qualifier un système de rabais d’abus de position dominante., Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2012 nº 33 p.22 (FR)
- Pollard, Marcus ; Rende Granata, Rosario Maria: The Animals Lurking in the Undergrowth - Derogations under the EU Merger Regulation, Journal of European Competition Law & Practice 2013 Vol. 4 nº 1 p.52-55 (EN)
- Frenz, Walter: Marktabgrenzung, Leistungssubstitution und Kreuzpreiselastizität, Neue Zeitschrift für Kartellrecht 2013 p.285-287 (DE)
- Marty, Frédéric: Éviction abusive - Remise de fidélité - Dénigrement - Opérateur historique : L'Autorité de la concurrence sanctionne l'opérateur historique en matière de télédiffusion par voie hertzienne à hauteur de 20.6 millions d'euros pour des pratiques d'éviction anticoncurrentielles durant le déploiement de la TNT passant par des stratégies de dénigrement et la mise en oeuvre de rabais de fidélité, Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2016 nº 3 p.79-82 (FR)
Procedural Analysis Information
Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling
Information not available
Subject-matter
- Competition
- - Dominant position
Provisions of national law referred to
Information not available
Provisions of international law referred to
Information not available
Procedure and result
- Actions for annulment
- Appeals : dismissal on substantive grounds
- Appeals : dismissal on grounds of inadmissibility
Formation of the Court
troisième chambre (Cour)
Judge-Rapporteur
Silva de Lapuerta
Advocate General
Mazák
Language(s) of the Case
Language(s) of the Opinion