Feed aggregator

In competition law there is a strong presumption of attributability of daughter’s action to the mother corporation as I discussed ia in my post on CJEU C-508/11 P ENI (references to further case-law there). In general in competition law there is a strong emphasis on the concept of an ‘economic unit’ which readly looks beyond the legal fiction of separate corporate personality.

In C‑425/22 MOL Magyar Olaj- és Gázipari Nyrt. v Mercedes-Benz Group AG (let’s shorten that to ‘MOL v Mercedez-Benz) Emiliou AG opined that for the purposes of Article 7(2) Brussels Ia jurisdiction a parent company cannot rely on the competition law concept of an economic unit in order to establish the jurisdiction of the courts where it has its registered seat to hear and determine its claim for damages for the harm suffered by its subsidiaries.

(14) Applicant is a company established in Hungary. It has a controlling interest in companies belonging to the MOL group. It is either the majority shareholder or holds another form of exclusive controlling power over a number of companies, such as MOLTRANS, established in Hungary; INA, established in Croatia; Panta and Nelsa, established in Italy; ROTH, established in Austria; and SLOVNAFT, established in Slovakia. During the infringement period identified by the relevant Commision Decision (the Trucks Cartel)

The AG of course refers to Bier, Dumez France (direct damage in one person rules out an extra A7(2) forum for the third party (mother corporation) victim of indirect damage), and other core cases on A7(2) which this blog frequently refers to and /or has discussed:

C‑352/13 CDC: A7(2) locus delicti commissi for cartels is the court of the place where the cartel was definitively formed, confirmed in flyLAL and criticised by me inter alia here;

C‑352/13 CDC (holding ia that A7(2) locus damni for infringement of cartel is the victim’s registered seat); that solution too as the AG notes (44) was met by criticism both by Bobek AG in his Opinion in flyLAL and by scholarship;

C-30/20 Volvo: more emphasis Emiliou AG suggests on the link between the market affected by the anticompetitive conduct and the place where the claimants allege to have suffered harm; in my post on the case I point out the CJEU’s fuzziness on the issue;

He also distinguishes CJEU Tibor Trans‘ distinct view on (in)direct damage as follows (36-37) – footnotes omitted:

36. It is true, as the applicant notes, that in the judgment in Tibor-Trans (which related to the same collusive behaviour as that established in the Commission Decision at issue in the present case), the Court distinguished that case from the scenario in Dumez. The particularity of the facts in Tibor-Trans was that the applicant in that case, an end user of the trucks, did not purchase any trucks from the defendant directly, but did so through a dealership. However, that did not prevent the Court from finding that the applicant’s claim in that case concerned direct damage, because that damage was found to be the immediate consequence of an infringement of Article 101 TFEU, given that the overcharge resulting from the collusive agreement was passed on to that applicant by the dealers.

37. Such passing-on may occur within a supply chain where the alleged victim acquires the goods (or services) which have been subject to a cartel. That, however, is not claimed to have occurred in the case in the main proceedings. Instead, the applicant appears to present the initial harm suffered by its subsidiaries as its own.

(52) The AG points out that the distinguishing feature here is that the applicant’s registered seat is situated outside the affected market. (57) Applicant seeks to extend the application of the registered seat connecting factor to establish jurisdiction in relation to its claim in which it seeks compensation for harm suffered solely by other members of its economic unit.

Emiliou AG does not believe the competition law concept can simply be extended for jurisdictional services, referring also to Szpunar AG’s Opinion in C‑632/22 (service of documents) on which see prof Matthias Weller here. For his extensive arguments based on A7(2)’s requirement of proximity, predictability of forum, Gleichlauf (less convincing imo), and that BIa’s jurisdictional rules guarantee efficient enforcement (particularly in A4 domicile jurisdiction), see the Opinion.

His final conclusion is that (98)

the term ‘the place where the harmful event occurred’, within the meaning of Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1215/2012, does not cover the registered office of the parent company that brings an action for damages for the harm caused solely to that parent company’s subsidiaries by the anticompetitive conduct of a third party, and where it is claimed that that parent company and those subsidiaries form part of the same economic unit.

As my colleague Joeri Vananroye summarises the Opinion:

“In corporate law terms: yes to outsider veil piercing, no to insider reverse veil piercing. Outsiders may disregard legal structure and go for economic reality; but not those who set up that structure. See also: rules on derivate damages.”

Blame Bier /Mines de Potasse d’Alsace for this complex set of rules and distinguishing.

Geert.

EU private international law, 4th ed. 2024, 2.438 ff.

 

Emiliou AG, A7(2) BIa
Parent company cannot rely on competition law concept of economic unit to establish jurisdiction where it has its registered seat, re claim for damages for the harm suffered by its subsidiaries.

MOl v Mercedes-Benz https://t.co/MC376UYiX0

— Geert Van Calster (@GAVClaw) February 14, 2024

Statistiques judiciaires 2023 : confirmation de la hausse structurelle du contentieux devant la Cour de justice

On 26 April 2024, a half-day conference will be held at 9 am CET, organized by the Centre for Private International Law at the School of Law, University of Aberdeen, in collaboration with the Faculty of Law, University of Ljubljana. The conference aims to explore crucial topics within the realm of private international law. The […]

Par un arrêt du 6 mars 2024, la Cour de cassation se prononce, à la suite d’un arrêt de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne, sur l’application du principe, désormais abrogé, d’unicité de l’instance en présence d’une procédure engagée par une salarié au Royaume-Uni et d’une procédure intervenue postérieurement en France.

en lire plus

Afin de déterminer si une plateforme d’intermédiation peut être interdite en application de la législation pharmaceutique et ce, conformément au droit de l’Union, il appartient à la juridiction nationale d’apprécier factuellement si le prestataire du service numérique se borne, par une prestation propre et distincte de la vente, à mettre en relation des pharmaciens et des acheteurs de médicaments sans ordonnance, ou si ce prestataire doit être regardé comme étant lui-même un vendeur.

Sur la boutique Dalloz Code de la santé publique 2023, annoté commenté en ligne Voir la boutique Dalloz

en lire plus

Engagement solennel devant la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne de trois nouveaux membres de la Cour des comptes européenne

Le Parlement européen et la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne réunis pour leur premier dialogue annuel

Illumina / Commission
Concurrence
Concentration Illumina-Grail : l’avocat général Emiliou propose d’annuler l’arrêt du Tribunal et les décisions de la Commission concernant la demande de renvoi

Confédération paysanne (Melons et tomates du Sahara occidental)
Rapprochement des législations
Avocate générale Ćapeta : les melons et les tomates issus du territoire du Sahara occidental doivent comporter dans leur étiquetage une mention du « pays d’origine » reflétant leur provenance de ce territoire

Commission / Front Polisario
Relations extérieures
Selon l’avocate générale Ćapeta, c’est à tort que le Tribunal a annulé la décision approuvant, au nom de l’Union européenne, un accord de traitement tarifaire préférentiel avec le Maroc relatif au territoire du Sahara occidental

Commission / Front Polisario
Relations extérieures
Selon l’avocate générale Ćapeta, la Cour devrait annuler la décision du Conseil portant conclusion de l’accord de partenariat dans le domaine de la pêche durable avec le Maroc

LEA
Culture
La législation italienne excluant de la gestion des droits d’auteur les sociétés indépendantes établies dans un autre État membre est incompatible avec le droit de l’Union

Cobult
Transport
Droit des passagers aériens : le passager est réputé avoir accepté le remboursement du billet sous la forme d’un bon de voyage lorsque, tout en remplissant un formulaire sur le site Internet du transporteur aérien, il a renoncé au remboursement du billet sous la forme d’une somme d’argent

Landeshauptstadt Wiesbaden
Espace de liberté, sécurité et justice
L’insertion obligatoire dans les cartes d’identité de deux empreintes digitales est compatible avec les droits fondamentaux au respect de la vie privée et à la protection des données à caractère personnel

Augustin Gridel (University of Lorraine) has kindly prepared a presentation in English of his monograph titled Marchés et instruments financiers en droit international privé (Financial Markets and Financial Instruments in Private International Law), published by Bruylant in 2023. The aim of this book is to describe the relationship between the law of financial markets and […]

On Tuesday, April 9, 2024, the Hamburg Max Planck Institute will host its 43rd monthly virtual workshop Current Research in Private International Law at 11:00-12:30 (CEST). Bettina Heiderhoff (Universität Münster) will speak, in German, about

Interfaces between Migration Law and International Family Law

The presentation will be followed by an open discussion. All are welcome. More information and sign-up here.

If you want to be invited to these events in the future, please write to veranstaltungen@mpipriv.de.

On 19 March 2024, the Council of the European Union approved the position of the European Parliament at first reading on the proposal for a directive on protecting persons who engage in public participation from manifestly unfounded or abusive court proceedings, also known as Strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPPs. The directive has thereby […]

Mazepin / Conseil
Relations extérieures
Guerre en Ukraine : le Tribunal annule les actes de maintien de M. Nikita Mazepin sur les listes des personnes visées par les mesures restrictives

The Council of the European Union on 15 March 2024 reached a final deal on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on corporate sustainability due diligence (see here and here for previous analysis on the proposal hosted on this blog). The deal comes after a series of meetings […]

A few days ago, the redesigned EAPIL website was launched. Among other things, it features a reserved area for members of the European Association of Private International Law (MyEAPIL). An automated e-mail message was sent to all the 560 members of the Association on 11 March 2024, with their personal login credentials. Several members have […]