Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 September 2017

Intel Corp. v European Commission

Appeal — Article 102 TFEU — Abuse of a dominant position — Loyalty rebates –– Commission’s jurisdiction — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Article 19

Case C-413/14 P



Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Order
ECLI:EU:C:2017:808
24/10/2017 Intel v Commission
Judgment (OJ)
20/10/2017 Intel v Commission
View pdf documents
Order
ECLI:EU:C:2017:700
19/09/2017 Intel v Commission
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2017:632
06/09/2017 Intel v Commission
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2017:632
06/09/2017 Intel v Commission
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2016:788
20/10/2016 Intel v Commission
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
24/10/2014 Intel v Commission
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

not yet published (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Information not available

Systematic classification scheme

1.
1 The legal order of the European Union
  1.06 EU law and international law
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.08 Competition
    4.08.00 EU competition rules
      4.08.00.04 Territorial scope
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
3 Legal proceedings
  3.10 Appeals
    3.10.06 Pleas in law
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.08 Competition
    4.08.03 Implementation of the competition rules
      4.08.03.02 Procedure for the application of the competition rules by the Commission
        4.08.03.02.06 Hearing of persons concerned and of third parties / Access to the file
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.08 Competition
    4.08.03 Implementation of the competition rules
      4.08.03.02 Procedure for the application of the competition rules by the Commission
        4.08.03.02.06 Hearing of persons concerned and of third parties / Access to the file
3 Legal proceedings
  3.10 Appeals
    3.10.06 Pleas in law
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.08 Competition
    4.08.03 Implementation of the competition rules
      4.08.03.02 Procedure for the application of the competition rules by the Commission
        4.08.03.02.06 Hearing of persons concerned and of third parties / Access to the file
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
3 Legal proceedings
  3.10 Appeals
    3.10.07 State of the proceedings permitting judgment to be given


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Operative part

Opinion


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 26/08/2014

Date of the Opinion

  • 20/10/2016

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

06/09/2017


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Judgment: OJ C 374 from 06.11.2017, p.2

Application: OJ C 395 from 10.11.2014, p.25

Name of the parties

Intel v Commission

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Ridyard, Derek: Calibration and consistency in Article 102 : Effects-based enforcement after the Intel and Post Danmark judgments, Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2016 nº 3 p.28-38 (EN)
  2. Haberer, Anno: Die Intel-Entscheidung des EuGH, Wirtschaft und Wettbewerb 2017 p.526-529 (DE)
  3. Wernicke, Stephan: Wettbewerbsrecht: Keine Geldbuße wegen Missbrauchs marktbeherrschender Stellung, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2017 p.859-861 (DE)
  4. Fanoy, J.W. ; Van Midden, G.J.: 341. Het Intel arrest: een (aarzelende) aanvaarding van de effects-based-approach bij getrouwheidskortingen, Tijdschrift Mededingingsrecht in de Praktijk 2017 p.45-51 (NL)
  5. Brauneck, Jens: Intel: Unterlassene Protokollierung im Kartellverfahren als folgenloser Verfahrensfehler?, Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht - EWS 2017 p.310-317 (DE)
  6. Ginneken, Béquet ; Gaëlle, Béquet: Intel ontleed, Markt & Mededinging 2017 p.172-177 (NL)
  7. Venit, James S.: The judgment of the European Court of Justice in Intel v Commission: a procedural answer to a substantive question?, European Competition Journal 2017 p.172-198 (EN)
  8. Pauer, Nada Ina: Die Entscheidung des EuGHs in der Rs Intel, ÖZK aktuell : Österreichische Zeitschrift für Kartell- und Wettbewerbsrecht 2017 p.219-226 (DE)
  9. Innerhofer, Isabelle: Intel C-413/14P - Der lange Arm des EU-Wettbewerbsrechts?, ÖZK aktuell : Österreichische Zeitschrift für Kartell- und Wettbewerbsrecht 2017 p.227-235 (DE)
  10. Carli, Cecilia: Intel contro tutti - I quesiti irrisolti della Corte di Giustizia, Mercato concorrenza regole 2017 p.479-493 (IT)
  11. Carli, Cecilia ; Pardolesi, Roberto: Il caso Intel e l'antitrust europeo : l'approccio economico alla riscossa, Il Foro italiano 2017 10 Col.479-487 (IT)
  12. Dittert, Daniel: Abus de position dominante en matière de rabais de fidélité : une jurisprudence " précisée " en termes de compétence, de procédure et, surtout, d'analyse économique, Revue des affaires européennes 2017 p.583-588 (FR)
  13. Blockx, J.: Misbruik van machtspositie: ook bij exclusiviteitskortingen is criterium van de even efficiënte concurrent relevant, S.E.W. : Tijdschrift voor Europees en economisch recht 2018 p.40-41 (NL)
  14. Ondrejka, Peter: Gewährung von Rabatten nach dem EuGH-Urteil Intel, Österreichisches Recht der Wirtschaft 2018 p.13-17 (DE)
  15. Neumayr, Florian: Rabatte im (Unions-)Kartellrecht, Österreichische Blätter für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht 2018 p.11-12 (DE)
  16. Idot, Laurence: Une lecture de l'arrêt Intel*, Concurrences : revue des droits de la concurrence 2018 nº 1 p.15-22 (FR)
  17. Petit, Nicolas: The case of the European Commission's curious interpretation of the Intel judgment, Competition Law & Policy Debate 2018 Vol. 4 p.98-101 (EN)
  18. Podszun, Rupprecht: The Role of Economics in Competition Law The “effects-based approach” after the Intel-judgment of the CJEU, Journal of European Consumer and Market Law 2018 p.00 (EN)
  19. Cardon, Mathieu: <<Intel missa est!>> Soixante ans de discussions inutiles autour du titre de compétence de la concurrence: le critère des effets qualifiés, Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 2018 n° 1 p.115-142 (FR)
  20. Howe, David ; Mansfield, Cian ; McGahan, Patrick: Intel on Jurisdiction: An Intelligent Approach to Treating Anticompetitive Conduct across Global Supply Chains, Global Competition Litigation Review 2018 Vol. 11 nº 1 p.28-34 (EN)
  21. Gilliams, Hans: Intel: effectenanalyse in misbruikzaken, Revue de droit commercial belge 2018 p.166-169 (NL)
  22. Colomo, Pablo Ibáñez: The Future of Article 102 TFEU after Intel, Journal of European Competition Law & Practice 2018 Vol.9 nº 5 p.293-303 (EN)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Information not available

Subject-matter

  • Competition
  • - Dominant position

Procedure and result

  • Actions for annulment
  • Appeal brought against a sanction
  • Appeals : application granted

Formation of the Court

grande chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

da Cruz Vilaça

Advocate General

Wahl

Language(s) of the Case

  • English

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • English