Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 13 September 2012 — Protégé International v Commission

(Case T-119/09)

‛Competition — Abuse of dominant position — Market for Irish whiskey — Decision to reject a complaint — Lack of Community interest’

1. Competition — Administrative procedure — Examination of complaints — Determination of priorities by the Commission — No obligation to rule by way of a decision on the existence of an infringement — Taking into account the Community interest in investigating a case — Discretionary power of the Commission — Duty to state reasons for a decision to take no further action — Judicial review (Arts 81 EC, 82 EC and 85(1) EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 7(2)) (see paras 32-38, 41)

2. Competition — Administrative procedure — Examination of complaints — Taking into account the Community interest in investigating a case — Criteria for assessment (Arts 81 EC and 82 EC) (see paras 39-40)

3. Competition — Dominant position — Abuse — Concept — Action before the national courts — Assessment criteria used by the Commission — Restrictive interpretation — General principle of access to a court to be taken into account (Art. 82 EC) (see paras 48-49, 56-58, 63, 65-67)

4. Competition — Administrative procedure — Examination of complaints — Assessment of the Community interest in investigating a case — Complaint referring to disputed procedures of an anti-competitive nature — Whether possibility of handling at national level to be taken into account — Lawfulness (Art. 82 EC) (see paras 77-79)

5. Competition — Dominant position — Abuse — Refusal of an undertaking in a dominant position to allow another undertaking access to a product or service necessary for its business — Refusal resulting in recourse to another supplier at higher prices — Fact not constituting an abusive practice (Art. 82 EC) (see paras 85-86)

Re:

ANNULMENT of Commission decision C(2009) 505 of 23 January 2009 (Case COMP/39414 — Protégé International/Pernod Ricard), taken pursuant to Article 7(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles [81 and 82 EC] (OJ 2004 L 123, p. 18) and rejecting, for lack of Community interest, the complaint lodged by the applicant concerning infringements of Article 82 EC allegedly committed by Pernod Ricard.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Protégé International Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

3. Orders Pernod Ricard SA to bear its own costs.

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 13 September 2012 — Protégé International v Commission

(Case T-119/09)

‛Competition — Abuse of dominant position — Market for Irish whiskey — Decision to reject a complaint — Lack of Community interest’

1. Competition — Administrative procedure — Examination of complaints — Determination of priorities by the Commission — No obligation to rule by way of a decision on the existence of an infringement — Taking into account the Community interest in investigating a case — Discretionary power of the Commission — Duty to state reasons for a decision to take no further action — Judicial review (Arts 81 EC, 82 EC and 85(1) EC; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 7(2)) (see paras 32-38, 41)

2. Competition — Administrative procedure — Examination of complaints — Taking into account the Community interest in investigating a case — Criteria for assessment (Arts 81 EC and 82 EC) (see paras 39-40)

3. Competition — Dominant position — Abuse — Concept — Action before the national courts — Assessment criteria used by the Commission — Restrictive interpretation — General principle of access to a court to be taken into account (Art. 82 EC) (see paras 48-49, 56-58, 63, 65-67)

4. Competition — Administrative procedure — Examination of complaints — Assessment of the Community interest in investigating a case — Complaint referring to disputed procedures of an anti-competitive nature — Whether possibility of handling at national level to be taken into account — Lawfulness (Art. 82 EC) (see paras 77-79)

5. Competition — Dominant position — Abuse — Refusal of an undertaking in a dominant position to allow another undertaking access to a product or service necessary for its business — Refusal resulting in recourse to another supplier at higher prices — Fact not constituting an abusive practice (Art. 82 EC) (see paras 85-86)

Re:

ANNULMENT of Commission decision C(2009) 505 of 23 January 2009 (Case COMP/39414 — Protégé International/Pernod Ricard), taken pursuant to Article 7(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles [81 and 82 EC] (OJ 2004 L 123, p. 18) and rejecting, for lack of Community interest, the complaint lodged by the applicant concerning infringements of Article 82 EC allegedly committed by Pernod Ricard.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Protégé International Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;