Case C-311/24, Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 29 April 2024 – Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde v M. GmbH
Date: 2024-04-29
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative sanction, agro-industry, claim, control of restrictive practices, payment, principle of proportionality, restriction on competition, supplier








C_202404312EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/4312


15.7.2024






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Wien (Austria) lodged on 29 April 2024 – Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde v M. GmbH


(Case C-311/24, Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde)

(C/2024/4312)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht Wien

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde

Defendant: M. GmbH

Questions referred







1(a)


Must Article 6(1)(e) of Directive (EU) 2019/633 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 concerning unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships in the agricultural and food supply chain be interpreted, in a situation in which a buyer, on the basis of a decision with a single intent and on the same day, separately requests – in breach of Article 3(1)(d) of that directive – a payment from various suppliers who are protected under Article 1 of that directive, as precluding national legislation according to which those requests for payment are to be regarded as a single infringement (several offences committed by means of a single act) in respect of which only a single penalty is to be imposed?










1(b)


Is it relevant to the answer to Question 1(a) – in the light of the requirement in the last sentence of Article 6(1) of Directive (EU) 2019/633, according to which the penalty is to be effective, proportionate and dissuasive, taking into account the nature, duration, recurrence and gravity of the infringement – that a fine of up to a maximum amount of (only) EUR 500 000 may be imposed for that infringement under the Austrian national rule imposing a penalty (Paragraph 6(2) of the FBWG (2))?










2.


If Question 1(a) is answered in the affirmative:
Must Article 6(1)(e) of Directive (EU) 2019/633 be interpreted as meaning that each request for payment sent to a supplier – in so far as it infringes the prohibition in Article 3(1)(d) of Directive (EU) 2019/633 – must be regarded as a trading practice which must be penalised independently and for which a separate penalty (fine) must be imposed in accordance with the principle of cumulation, so that several fines must be imposed, taking into account that the Austrian national rule imposing a penalty (Paragraph 6(2) of the FBWG) provides for the imposition of a fine of up to a maximum amount of EUR 500 000?






(1)  Directive (EU) 2019/633 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships in the agricultural and food supply chain (OJ 2019 L 111, p. 59).

(2)  Bundesgesetz zur Verbesserung der Nahversorgung und der Wettbewerbsbedingungen (Faire-Wettbewerbsbedingungen-Gesetz, BGBl. 392/1977) (Federal Law on the improvement of local supply and conditions of competition (Law on fair conditions of competition)), as last amended (Bundesgesetz, mit dem das Bundesgesetz zur Verbesserung der Nahversorgung und der Wettbewerbsbedingungen geändert wird, BGBl. I 239/2021) (Federal Law amending the Federal Law on the improvement of local supply and conditions of competition).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4312/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)