Reports of Cases
published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)
Subject-matter
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Cour de cassation (France) – Interpretation of Article 101(1) TFEU and Article 3(2) of Council Regulation No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L 1, p. 1) – Relationship between Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and national competition laws – Possibility for national courts and national competition authorities to bring proceedings and to impose penalties in respect of an agreement, decision or concerted practice which may affect trade between Member States but which does not exceed the market share thresholds laid down by the Commission – Agreement with an anti-competitive object
Systematic classification scheme
1.
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.01 Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
4.08.01.05
|
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.01 Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
4.08.01.05
|
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.01 Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
4.08.01.04 null
4.08.01.04.02 null
4.08.01.04.02.01 null
4.08.01.04.02.01.01
|
|
|
4.08.03.05 Implementation by the national competition authorities
|
|
|
4 Internal policy of the European Union
4.08 Competition
4.08.03 Implementation of the competition rules
4.08.03.05 Implementation by the national competition authorities
|
Citations of case-law or legislation
References in grounds of judgment
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81
-P1 : paragraphs 4, 8
-
TFEU, Article 101
: paragraphs 18, 19, 23, 25
-
TFEU, Article 101
-P1 : paragraphs 1, 14, 15, 17, 33, 35, 38
-
TFEU, Article 267
: paragraph 34
-
Regulation 1/2003
-A03P1 : paragraphs 3, 18
-
Regulation 1/2003
-A03P2 : paragraphs 1, 3, 14, 19, 38
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/64
: paragraph 35
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -58/64
: paragraph 35
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -5/69
: paragraphs 16, 22
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -1/71
: paragraphs 21, 22
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -70/93
: paragraph 17
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/95
: paragraph 16
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -215/96
: paragraph 16
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -216/96
: paragraph 16
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -306/96
: paragraph 17
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -202/02
: paragraph 28
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -205/02
: paragraph 28
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -206/02
: paragraph 28
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -207/02
: paragraph 28
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -208/02
: paragraph 28
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -213/02
: paragraph 28
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -238/05
: paragraph 16
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -409/06
: paragraph 34
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -501/06
: paragraph 21
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -513/06
: paragraph 21
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -515/06
: paragraph 21
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -519/06
: paragraph 21
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -238/06
: paragraph 21
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -209/07
: paragraph 36
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -260/07
: paragraph 17
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -8/08
: paragraph 36
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -272/09
: paragraph 35
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -360/09
: paragraph 29
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -410/09
: paragraph 30
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -17/10
: paragraph 18
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -389/10
: paragraph 35
Operative part
Opinion
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81
: points 2, 7, 21, 23, 27, 37, 47
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81
-P1 : points 6, 49, 56, 58
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 82
: point 37
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 83
: point 30
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 85
: point 29
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 85
-P3 : point 30
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 89
: point 30
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 211
-T2 : point 29
-
EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 249
-L5 : point 30
-
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2007), Article 49
: point 33
-
TFEU, Article 101
: points 5, 6
-
TFEU, Article 101
-P1 : point 19
-
TFEU, Article 267
-L1LB : point 46
-
Regulation 1/2003
: points 5, 6, 37, 38
-
Regulation 1/2003
-A03 : points 7, 21
-
Regulation 1/2003
-A03P2 : points 4, 19 - 23, 58
-
Regulation 1/2003
-A05L1 : point 33
-
Regulation 1/2003
-A10 : point 31
-
Regulation 1/2003
-A11P1 : points 8, 38
-
Regulation 1/2003
-C1 : points 9, 37
-
Regulation 1/2003
-C6 : points 9, 37
-
Regulation 1/2003
-C8 : points 9, 22, 37, 38
-
Regulation 1/2003
-C14 : points 9, 31
-
Regulation 1/2003
-C15 : points 9, 38, 42
-
Regulation 1/2003
-C22 : points 9, 37
-
Regulation 1/2003
-C34 : points 9, 37, 38
-
Commission - Other Acts - 52001XC1222(03)
: points 1, 3, 10, 19 - 58
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/64
: point 48
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/65
: points 23, 55
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -5/69
: points 23, 47, 54
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -1/71
: points 23, 41, 47, 54
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -22/71
: point 23
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -127/73
: point 33
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -19/77
: points 55, 56
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -100/80
: points 55, 56
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -96/82
: point 41
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -107/82
: point 55
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -190/82
: point 36
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -322/88
: points 38, 46
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -70/93
: point 47
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/95
: points 23, 55
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -288/96
: points 36, 51
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -306/96
: point 23
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -126/97
: point 29
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -180/98
: point 41
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -344/98
: points 29, 38
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -453/99
: points 29, 33
-
General Court - Judgment T -44/00
: point 55
-
General Court - Judgment T -50/00
: point 55
-
General Court - Judgment T -67/00
: point 55
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -60/02
: points 33, 38
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -189/02
: points 26, 35, 36
-
General Court - Judgment T -53/03
: point 55
-
Court of Justice - Opinion C -407/04
: point 50
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -167/04
: point 36
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -295/04
: point 33
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -75/05
: point 51
-
Court of Justice - Opinion C -125/05
: point 37
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -238/05
: point 23
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -303/05
: point 33
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -501/06
: point 48
-
Court of Justice - Opinion C -550/07
: point 37
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -209/07
: points 41, 48, 50, 55
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -260/07
: points 23, 47
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -415/07
: point 46
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -429/07
: point 37
-
Court of Justice - Opinion C -8/08
: point 50
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -8/08
: points 33, 41, 48, 50, 51
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -403/08
: points 48, 55
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -439/08
: point 37
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -52/09
: point 29
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -272/09
: points 36, 48
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/09
: point 33
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -360/09
: point 26
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -375/09
: points 31, 38
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -410/09
: point 32
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -439/09
: points 41, 48
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -520/09
: points 26, 36
-
Court of Justice - Opinion C -17/10
: points 21, 37
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -17/10
: point 21
Dates
Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings
Date of the Opinion
Date of the hearing
Information not available
Date of delivery
13/12/2012
References
Publication in the Official Journal
Application: OJ C 211 from 16.07.2011, p.17
Judgment: OJ C 38 from 09.02.2013, p.6
Name of the parties
Expedia
Notes on Academic Writings
- Jalabert-Doury, Nathalie: Application parallèle du droit européen et du droit national : L'Avocat Général Kokott précise les conditions d'application de la Communication de minimis en cas de restriction par objet, Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2012 nº 4 p.68 (FR)
- Arhel, Pierre: Activité des juridictions de l'Union européenne en droit de la concurrence (Septembre 2012) (1ère partie). CJUE, 6 sept. 2012, no C-226/11 P, conclusions de l'avocat général sur l'affaire Expedia, Petites affiches. La Loi / Le Quotidien juridique 2012 nº 256 p.5-8 (FR)
- Probst, J. ; Lütz, F.: La jurisprudence de la Cour de justice et du Tribunal de première instance. Chronique des arrêts. Droit de la concurrence « de minimis ». Arrêt « Expedia c. Autorité de la concurrence », Revue du droit de l'Union européenne 2012 nº 4 p.748-753 (FR)
- Maréchal, Camille: Application du droit de la concurrence de l'Union européenne par une autorité nationale : restrictions de concurrence par l'objet et seuil de sensibilité, La Semaine Juridique - entreprise et affaires 2013 nº 2 p.36-40 (FR)
- Aubert, Michel ; Broussy, Emmanuelle ; Cassagnabère, Hervé: Chronique de jurisprudence de la CJUE. Ententes - Communication de minimis, L'actualité juridique ; droit administratif 2013 p.340-341 (FR)
- Fromont, Ann: L'arrêt "Expedia": l'application des seuils de minimis par les autorités nationales de concurrence, Journal de droit européen 2013 nº 195 p.13-15 (FR)
- Idot, Laurence: Ententes, restriction par objet et théorie du seuil de sensibilité. Les autorités nationales de concurrence peuvent poursuivre sur le double fondement du droit de l'Union et de leur droit interne une entente qui n'atteint pas les seuils fixés par la communication de minimis, pourvu que cet accord constitue une restriction sensible au sens de l'article 101, paragraphe 1 TFUE, Europe 2013 Février Comm. nº 2 p.38 (FR)
- Doherty, Barry: Commercial Law Practitioner 2013 p.64 (EN)
- Grune, Jeanette K.: Kartellrecht: Spürbarkeit einer Wettbewerbsbeschränkung - Unverbindlichkeit der De-minimis-Bekanntmachung, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2013 p.116-117 (DE)
- Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2013 nº 253 (NL)
- Palzer, Christoph: Kartellrecht: Anwendung des Art. 101 Abs. 1 AEUV durch nationale Behörde, wenn die Schwellen der De minimis-Bekanntmachung nicht erreicht sind, der Wettbewerb durch die Unternehmens-vereinbarung aber spürbar beschränkt wird - "Expedia", Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht - EWS 2013 p.151-153 (DE)
- Esken, Nadia: Das Expedia-Urteil des EuGH - Folgen für die kartellrechtliche Praxis, Wettbewerb in Recht und Praxis 2013 p.443-445 (DE)
- Robin, Catherine: Entente et communication de minimis, Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2013 nº 35 p.26 (FR)
- Cornelissen, H.M.: Het Expedia-arrest: een merkbare koerswijziging?, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2013 p.171-177 (NL)
- Braeken, B.J.H. ; Tuinenga, S.: Hof an Justitie zaait verwarring in Expedia over markbaarheidsvereiste bij doelbeperkingen, Tijdschrift Mededingingsrecht in de Praktijk 2013 p.111-115 (NL)
- Bushell, Gavin ; Healy, Melissa: Expedia: The de minimis Notice and "by object" Restrictions, Journal of European Competition Law & Practice 2013 Vol. 4 nº 3 p.224-226 (EN)
- Van der Vijver, Tjarda ; Vollering, Stefan: Understanding appreciability: The European Court of Justice reviews the journey in Expedia, Common Market Law Review 2013 p.1133-1144 (EN)
- Ortega Gonzalez, Angela: Restrictions by object and the appreciability test: the Expedia case, a surprising judgment or a simple clarification?, European Competition Law Review 2013 p.457-465 (EN)
- Van Hasselt, E.F. ; Urlus, H.E. ; Baars, A.: HvJ EU Expedia en de mededingingsrechtelijke merkbaarheid. Gevolgen voor de Nederlandse praktijk, Markt & Mededinging 2013 p.119-125 (NL)
- Behar-Touchais, Martine: Que vaut la communication de minimis face à une restriction de concurrence par l'objet ?, Revue des contrats 2013 p.598-604 (FR)
- Paffarini, Jacopo: L'irrilevanza del grado di significatività della restrizione prodotta dall'accordo avente un oggetto anticoncorrenziale ai fini dell'applicazione della normativa comunitaria antitrust, Diritto pubblico comparato ed europeo 2013 p.708-712 (IT)
- Appeldoorn, J.F.: S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2013 p.500-502 (NL)
- Bastidas Venegas, Vladimir: Expediamålet - Särskilt allvarliga begränsningar och kravet på märkbarhet, Europarättslig tidskrift 2013 Nr 3 p.557-569 (SV)
- Agisilaos, Panagiotis ; Kalli, Dimitra: To dogma de minimis den apotelei pleon "asfales limani" gia symfonies metaxy epicheiriseon pou ex antikeimenou periorizoun ton antagonismo - oi proektaseis tis prosfatis apofasis tou Dikastiriou tis Evropaikis Enosis se schesi me tin ypothesi Expedia , Kypriako Nomiko Vima 2013 p.28-36 (EL)
- Hargita, Árpád: Kit köt a közlemény és mennyire?, Versenytükör 2013 2. szám p.82-89 (HU)
- Outhuijse, A.: Wat doet de Nederlandse rechter met het merkbaarheidsvereiste na Expedia?, S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2014 p.00 (NL)
- King, Saskia: How appreciable is object? The de minimis doctrine and Case C-226/11 Expedia Inc v Autorité de la concurrence, European Competition Journal 2015 p.1-25 (EN)
Procedural Analysis Information
Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling
Cour de cassation - France
Subject-matter
Provisions of national law referred to
Code de commerce, article L. 420-1 Code de commerce, article L. 464-6-1
Provisions of international law referred to
Information not available
Procedure and result
- Reference for a preliminary ruling
Formation of the Court
deuxième chambre (Cour)
Judge-Rapporteur
Lõhmus
Advocate General
Kokott
Language(s) of the Case
Language(s) of the Opinion