Judgment;Information — ECLI:EU:C:2020:53
Date: 2020-01-30
Language of the case: Czech
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Competition;Dominant position
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded;Appeal - inadmissible
Origin: Czechia

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 January 2020 — České dráhy v Commission (Joined Cases C‑538/18 P and C‑539/18 P)(1) (Appeal — Competition — Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Article 20(4) — Inspection decisions — Duty to state reasons — Reasonable grounds for finding an infringement of competition rules — Evidence lawfully gathered — Inspection ordered on the basis of evidence obtained from a previous inspection) 1. Competition — Administrative procedure — Commission's power of inspection — Decision ordering an inspection — Obligation to state reasons — Scope — Duty to specify the subject matter and purpose of the inspection — Duty to integrate the information received by a national authority in the context of an inquiry initiated on the basis of national law — Not included — Clear indication of the evidence suggesting an infringement — Duty to make a legal categorisation of the assumed infringements — None (Arts 102 and 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 20(4)) (see paras 40-50, 62) 2. Competition — Administrative procedure — Commission's power of inspection — Use of an inspection decision — Discretion of the Commission — Limits — Observance of the principle of proportionality — Clear indication of the evidence suggesting an infringement — Duty to assess all exculpatory evidence — None (Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 20(4)) (see paras 63-65) 3. Competition — Dominant position — Abuse — Meaning — Conduct having a restrictive effect on competition —Implementation of a exclusionary tariff strategy — Included —Lack of actual results on competitors — Irrelevant (Art. 102 TFEU) (see paras 66-70) 4. Competition — Administrative procedure — Commission's power of inspection — Decision ordering an inspection — Obligation to state reasons — Scope — Obligation to identify precisely the relevant market — Duty to show that the effect on trade between Member States is appreciable — None (Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 20(4)) (see paras 80-83) 5. Competition — Administrative procedure — Commission’s power of inspection — Scope and limits — Inspection covering the practice of predatory pricing of a dominant undertaking — Review of documents relating to the costs and strategy of the undertaking — Whether permissible (Art. 102 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 20) (see paras 99-104) Operative part The Court: 1. dismisses the appeals; 2. orders České dráhy a.s. to pay the costs. 1 OJ C 392, 29.10.2018.