Category Archives: Cartels

Posts on cases or issues involving anti-competitive agreements or coordination between competitors. Assessed under Article 101 TFEU and corresponding national provisions.

2016: This happened in the Nordics

Here’s our roundup of the most interesting competition law developments in the Nordic countries in 2016.

Mergers

  • Non-compete clause. The Stockholm District Court found against the Swedish Competition Authority that a non-compete clause lasting five years did not constitute an infringement of competition rules by object, and was further unable to identify anti-competitive effects. As a result, the Court refused to impose the fines of around EUR 5 million that the SCA had requested. The Patent and Market Court will hear the authority’s appeal in September 2017.
  • Read more

    Mind the Gap: Another Hurdle for Damages Claims in the EEA?

    Guest post by Elisabeth Lian Haugsdal

    Photo: Kevin George/Shutterstock

    We are delighted to publish a post written by Elisabeth Lian Haugsdal. Elisabeth currently works as a Legal Officer at EFTA in Brussels and is one of the true experts on the peculiarities of the EEA Agreement, the agreement that extends the effect of most EU legislation to include Norway and the other EFTA countries (except Switzerland). As always, the views expressed on this blog are personal and covered by the disclaimer. Read more

    The Danish fine regime is changing gear

    On 8 November 2016, Opel Danmark A/S accepted a fine of DKK 8.25m for resale price maintenance. The fine is more than four times bigger than the previous highest fine issued for resale price maintenance. The fine shows that the amendment of the Danish Competition Act in 2013 whereby the fine level was dramatically increased is finally becoming real. According to the amendment, the fine level should be significantly raised as the Act recommends that fines should be raised by a factor of 10. However, since the Act was amended, no cases concerning the new regime have been seen. The Opel case is changing this. Read more

    HELSINKI COURT OF APPEAL REJECTS DAMAGES CLAIMS AGAINST SUCCESSORS

    A street, motor-way, landscape, sky

    Photo: Shutterstock

    Liability based on the concepts of a single economic entity or economic succession is well-establish in competition law. The Helsinki Court of Appeal’s judgments in the asphalt cartel follow-on damages cases on 20 October 2016 are, however, a reminder that competition law concepts on liability do not necessarily apply in the follow-on damages cases which are subject to a civil law assessment.

    Majority of claims were dismissed Read more

    Consortium, cartel or something in between?

    The Danish Competition Appeals Board (“CAB”) has upheld the Danish Competition Council’s (“DCC”) decision that a consortium infringed the Danish Competition Act. The CAB also confirmed the DCC’s conclusion that a consortium was indeed a “by object” infringement. In the CAB’s view, the consortium agreement restricted competition by its very nature. Yet, the CAB at the same time concluded that the consortium was not a “classic cartel” and that the agreement was not a market sharing agreement or a price fixing agreement. By introducing a “classic cartel” (and “non-classic cartel”), the CAB’s decision provides more uncertainty to the legal assessment of a consortium agreement. Read more