# C_2018052EN.01000501.xml

| 12.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/5

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main — Germany) — Coty Germany GmbH v Parfümerie Akzente GmbH

(Case C-230/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Article 101(1) TFEU - Selective distribution of luxury cosmetics products - Clause prohibiting distributors from making use of a non-authorised third party in the context of internet sales - Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 - Article 4(b) and (c)))

(2018/C 052/06)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Coty Germany GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Parfümerie Akzente GmbH

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 101(1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a selective distribution system for luxury goods designed, primarily, to preserve the luxury image of those goods complies with that provision to the extent that resellers are chosen on the basis of objective criteria of a qualitative nature that are laid down uniformly for all potential resellers and applied in a non-discriminatory fashion and that the criteria laid down do not go beyond what is necessary. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 101(1) TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a selective distribution system for luxury goods designed, primarily, to preserve the luxury image of those goods complies with that provision to the extent that resellers are chosen on the basis of objective criteria of a qualitative nature that are laid down uniformly for all potential resellers and applied in a non-discriminatory fashion and that the criteria laid down do not go beyond what is necessary.

| 2. | Article 101(1) TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding a contractual clause, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which prohibits authorised distributors in a selective distribution system for luxury goods designed, primarily, to preserve the luxury image of those goods from using, in a discernible manner, third-party platforms for the internet sale of the contract goods, on condition that that clause has the objective of preserving the luxury image of those goods, that it is laid down uniformly and not applied in a discriminatory fashion, and that it is proportionate in the light of the objective pursued, these being matters to be determined by the referring court. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 101(1) TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding a contractual clause, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which prohibits authorised distributors in a selective distribution system for luxury goods designed, primarily, to preserve the luxury image of those goods from using, in a discernible manner, third-party platforms for the internet sale of the contract goods, on condition that that clause has the objective of preserving the luxury image of those goods, that it is laid down uniformly and not applied in a discriminatory fashion, and that it is proportionate in the light of the objective pursued, these being matters to be determined by the referring court.

| 3. | Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 of 20 April 2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices must be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings, the prohibition imposed on the members of a selective distribution system for luxury goods, which operate as distributors at the retail level of trade, of making use, in a discernible manner, of third-party undertakings for internet sales does not constitute a restriction of customers, within the meaning of Article 4(b) of that regulation, or a restriction of passive sales to end users, within the meaning of Article 4(c) of that regulation. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 of 20 April 2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices must be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings, the prohibition imposed on the members of a selective distribution system for luxury goods, which operate as distributors at the retail level of trade, of making use, in a discernible manner, of third-party undertakings for internet sales does not constitute a restriction of customers, within the meaning of Article 4(b) of that regulation, or a restriction of passive sales to end users, within the meaning of Article 4(c) of that regulation.

---

(1)  OJ C 260, 18.7.2016.

1

---