Agrégateur de flux

My review of Wahl AG’s Opinion gives readers necessary detail on C-595/17 Apple v eBizcuss. In 2012 eBizcuss started suing Apple for alleged anti-competitive behaviour, arguing Apple systematically favours its own, vertically integrated distribution network. Can choice of court in their original contract cover the action (meaning the French courts would not have jurisdiction).

The Court says it can, both for Article 101 TFEU (cartels) and for 102 TFEU actions (abuse of dominant position), but particularly for the latter. In both cases the final say rests with the national courts who are best placed to appreciate the choice of court provisions in their entire context.

For Article 101 TFEU actions, the window is a narrow one (at 28: ‘the anti‑competitive conduct covered by Article 101 TFEU, namely an unlawful cartel, is in principle not directly linked to the contractual relationship between a member of that cartel and a third party which is affected by the cartel’). For Article 102 TFEU, as noted by other, it is wider (‘the anti‑competitive conduct covered by Article 102 TFEU, namely the abuse of a dominant position, can materialise in contractual relations that an undertaking in a dominant position establishes and by means of contractual terms’). The overall context of appreciation is that of predictability: at 29 (referring to CDC): ‘in the context of an action based on Article 102 TFEU, taking account of a jurisdiction clause that refers to a contract and ‘the corresponding relationship’ cannot be regarded as surprising one of the parties.’

Geert.

Le Groupe SOS vient de décrocher l’appel d’offres du ministère de la justice face au programme de déradicalisation Rive. Ce fleuron du social français est dirigé par Jean-Marc Borello, un ancien éducateur spécialisé dans un centre d’accueil pour jeunes délinquants.

en lire plus

L’arrêt rapporté est l’occasion de mesurer, à propos de l’énonciation des principaux éléments à charge exposés au cours des délibérations, les conséquences de la déclaration d’inconstitutionnalité du 2 mars 2018 relative à la motivation du choix de la peine par les cours d’assises.

en lire plus