Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administratīvā apgabaltiesa (Latvia) lodged on 4 October 2023 – AS ‘Tallinna Kaubamaja Grupp’, AS ‘KIA Auto’ v Konkurences padome

(Case C-606/23, Tallinna Kaubamaja Grupp and KIA Auto)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Administratīvā apgabaltiesa

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: AS ‘Tallinna Kaubamaja Grupp’, AS ‘KIA Auto’

Defendant: Konkurences padome

Questions referred

In accordance with Article 101(1) TFEU, for the purposes of determining the existence of a prohibited agreement establishing restrictions in respect of car warranties which, in order for the car’s warranty to remain valid, oblige or induce car owners to carry out the repair and maintenance of that car solely at authorised representatives of the car’s manufacturer and to use the original spare parts of that manufacturer in its servicing, must the competition authority demonstrate the existence of actual and real restrictive effects on competition?

In accordance with Article 101(1) TFEU, for the purposes of determining the existence of the agreement mentioned in the first question referred, is it sufficient for the competition authority to demonstrate solely the existence of potential restrictive effects on competition?

____________