62018TJ0515_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 16 December 2020 –Fakro v Commission
(Case T‑515/18)
(Competition – Abuse of dominant position – Market for roof windows and flashings – Decision rejecting a complaint – Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 – Access to the file – Principle of sound administration – Reasonable period – Manifest error of assessment – Obligation to state reasons – No EU interest – Probability of being able to establish the existence of an infringement – Predatory pricing – ‘Fighting brands’ – Rebates – Exclusivity)
1.
Competition – Administrative procedure – Rights of complainants – Access to documents – Scope – Limits
(Arts 101 and 102 TFEU; Commission Regulation No 773/2004, Art. 8(1))
(see paras 41-61, 136, 155)
2.
Competition – Administrative procedure – Examination of complaints – Decision of the Commission suspending the procedure – Discretion of the Commission – Limits – Statement of reasons for the decision to take no action – Scope – Judicial review – Scope
(Arts 101, 102 and 105 TFEU)
(see paras 66-77, 139, 140, 144-149, 173)
3.
Competition – Administrative procedure – Obligations of the Commission – Duty to act within a reasonable time – Criteria for assessment – No infringement
(Art. 102 TFEU)
(see paras 80-95)
4.
Competition – Administrative procedure – Examination of complaints – Obligation to conduct an investigation and rule by decision on the existence of an infringement – None
(Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 7; Commission Regulation No 773/2004, Art. 7)
(see paras 98, 99, 208)
5.
Competition – Division of jurisdiction between the Commission and national competition authorities – Commission Notice on Cooperation within the Network of Competition Authorities – Undertakings entitled to have their cases dealt with by a given competition authority – None
(Arts 101 and 102 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Recital 18 and Arts 4, 5 and 13(1); Commission Notice 2004/C 101/03)
(see paras 104-109, 116, 119)
6.
Competition – EU rules – Application by national courts – Action for compensation of the damage caused by infringements of the rules on competition
(Arts 101 and 102 TFEU; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 6)
(see paras 120-122)
7.
Competition – Dominant position – Abuse – Below cost pricing with the aim of eliminating a competitor – Burden of proof
(Art. 102 TFEU)
(see paras 130-132, 153)
8.
Judicial proceedings – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements – No brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based – Inadmissibility
(Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21, first para. and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 76(d))
(see paras 160, 161)
9.
Competition – Administrative procedure – Examination of complaints – Account to be taken of the EU interest in investigating a case – Criteria for assessment – Inadmissibility of the dismissal of a complaint solely on the basis that the infringement complained of has ceased
(Arts 101, 102 and 105 TFEU; Commission Notice 2004/C 101/05, points 41 to 44)
(see paras 179-181)
Re:
Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2018) 3864 final of 14 June 2018 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant alleging infringements of Article 102 TFEU in the market for roof windows and flashings (Case AT.40026 – Velux).
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders Fakro sp. z o.o., the European Commission and the Republic of Poland to each bear their own costs.