Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 24 October 2018

Apple Sales International and Others v MJA

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France)

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 23 — Jurisdiction clause in a distribution contract — Action for damages by the distributor based on the infringement of Article 102 TFEU by the supplier

Case C-595/17


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Judgment (OJ)
07/12/2018 Apple Sales International and Others
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2018:854
24/10/2018 Apple Sales International and Others
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2018:854
24/10/2018 Apple Sales International and Others
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2018:541
05/07/2018 Apple Sales International and Others
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
01/12/2017 Apple Sales International and Others
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Information not available

Systematic classification scheme

1.
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.06 Area of freedom, security and justice
    4.06.02 Judicial cooperation in civil matters
      4.06.02.01 Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments – Civil and commercial matters
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.06 Area of freedom, security and justice
    4.06.02 Judicial cooperation in civil matters
      4.06.02.01 Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments – Civil and commercial matters


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

  • TFEU, Article 101 : paragraphs 25, 28, 35
  • TFEU, Article 102 : paragraphs 2, 12, 19, 20, 26, 28 - 31, 35, 36
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A23 : paragraphs 1, 4, 15, 19, 20, 26, 30, 31, 34, 36
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A23P1 : paragraph 25
  • Regulation 44/2001 -C2 : paragraph 3
  • Regulation 44/2001 -C11 : paragraph 3
  • Regulation 44/2001 -C14 : paragraph 3
  • Directive 2014/104 -C3 : paragraph 35
  • Directive 2014/104 -C12 : paragraph 35
  • Directive 2014/104 -C13 : paragraph 35
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -295/04 -N60 : paragraph 35
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 : paragraph 15
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N67 : paragraph 21
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N68 : paragraph 22
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N69 : paragraph 23
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N70 : paragraph 24
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N72 : paragraph 25
  • Court of Justice - Opinion C -595/17 : paragraph 33

Operative part

  • Interprets : Regulation 44/2001 -A23
  • Interprets : TFEU, Article 102

Opinion

  • TFEU, Article 101 : points 46, 69, 70, 75, 84
  • TFEU, Article 102 : points 2, 4, 12, 19, 21, 23, 40, 46, 49, 51, 69, 70, 73, 78, 79, 84, 89, 90
  • TFEU, Article 267 : point 47
  • Regulation 44/2001 : points 27, 28, 34, 45, 48, 85, 87
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A22 : point 43
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A23 : points 1, 15, 19, 21, 25 - 27, 29, 30, 36, 37, 40, 41, 47, 49, 50, 69, 79, 88 - 90
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A23P1 : points 6, 52, 86
  • Regulation 44/2001 -C2 : point 5
  • Regulation 44/2001 -C11 : points 5, 29
  • Regulation 44/2001 -C14 : points 5, 29
  • Decision 2006/903 : point 62
  • Regulation 1215/2012 -A25 : point 37
  • Directive 2014/104 -C3 : point 84
  • Directive 2014/104 -C12 : point 84
  • Directive 2014/104 -C13 : point 84
  • Brussels Convention 1968 : point 28
  • Brussels Convention 1968 -A17 : points 30, 36, 37
  • Brussels Convention 1968 -A17L1 : point 27
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -24/76 -N6 : point 30
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -24/76 -N7 : point 30
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -150/80 -N27 : point 36
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -214/89 -N31 : point 31
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -269/95 -N26 : point 28
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -269/95 -N27 : point 38
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -269/95 -N29 : points 29, 38
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -159/97 -N46 : point 36
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -159/97 -N49 : point 30
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -295/04 -N60 : point 46
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -360/09 -N28 : point 84
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -360/09 -N29 : point 84
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 : points 4, 15, 22, 47, 58, 81
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N59 : point 86
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N61 : point 86
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N62 : point 87
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N63 : points 47, 87
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N67 : point 32
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N68 : point 31
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N69 : point 60
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -352/13 -N71 : point 60
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -102/15 -N34 : point 85
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -222/15 -N44 : point 87
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -436/16 -N31 : point 27
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -436/16 -N33 : point 87
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -436/16 -N39 : point 30


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 16/10/2017

Date of the Opinion

  • 05/07/2018

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

24/10/2018


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Judgment: OJ C 4 from 07.01.2019, p.9

Application: OJ C 437 from 18.12.2017, p.21

Name of the parties

Apple Sales International and Others

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Moura Ramos, Rui Manuel: Acórdão de 24/10/2018 (Pactos atributivos de jurisdição e direito da concorrência), Revista de legislação e de jurisprudência 2018 p.108-131 (PT)
  2. Idot, Laurence: Clause attributive de juridiction et action en droit de la concurrence, Europe 2018 Décembre Comm. nº 12 p.42 (FR)
  3. Wiegandt, Dirk: Zur Anwendung einer Gerichtsstandsklausel auf Schadensersatzklage eines Händlers gegen Lieferanten wegen Marktmachtmissbrauchs ("Apple Sales International u. a. "), Entscheidungen zum Wirtschaftsrecht 2019 N°2 p.61-62 (DE)
  4. Seggewiße, Oliver: Anwendbarkeit einer Gerichtsstandsklausel auf Schadensersatzklage wegen Wettbewerbsverstoβ, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2019 N°2p.81-82 (DE)
  5. Mankowski, Peter: Reichweite von Gerichtsstandsvereinbarungen - kartellrechtliche Schadensersatzklage, Juristenzeitung 2019 p.141-144 (DE)
  6. Krüger, Carsten ; Seegers, Martin: Gerichtsstands- und Schiedsklauseln bei Schadensersatz in Missbrauchs- und Kartellfällen im Lichte des Apple-Urteils des EuGH, Wirtschaft und Wettbewerb 2019 N°4 p.170-173 (DE)
  7. Sirakova, Kristina ; Westerhoven, Polina: Erfassen allgemein formulierte Gerichtsstandsvereinbarungen Schadensersatzklagen wegen Missbrauchs marktbeherrschender Stellung?, Praxis des internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts 2019 p.493-496 (DE)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Cour de cassation - France

Subject-matter

  • area of freedom, security and justice
  • - Judicial cooperation in civil matters
  • Competition
  • - Dominant position

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

Formation of the Court

troisième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Safjan

Advocate General

Wahl

Language(s) of the Case

  • French

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • French