Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber, Extended Composition) of 27 September 2023 – Valve v Commission

(Case T‑172/21) (
[1](#t-ECR_62021TJ0172_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(Competition
 – 
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
 – 
Market for PC video games
 – 
Platform
 – 
Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement
 – 
Restriction of parallel imports
 – 
Concepts of ‘agreement’ and ‘concerted practice’
 – 
Restriction of competition by object
 – 
Copyright)

| 1. | Competition – EU rules – Substantive scope – Agreements between an undertaking and its service provider – Included – Conditions  (Art. 101(1) TFEU)  (see paragraphs 46-52) |

| 2. | Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Agreements between undertakings – Concept – Joint intention as to the conduct to be adopted on the market – Geo-blocking of video games implemented by a service-providing undertaking at the request of its contracting partner – Included – Need for the service-providing undertaking to benefit from the infringement – None  (Art. 101(1) TFEU)  (see paragraphs 43, 45, 54, 55, 57, 68, 70, 73, 74, 76, 78-80, 221) |

| 3. | Competition – Administrative procedure – Commission decision finding an infringement – Burden of proving the infringement and its duration on the Commission – Extent of the burden of proof – Proof adduced by a number of indicia and coincidences pointing to the existence and duration of continuous anti-competitive practices – Whether permissible – Some items of evidence relating to a territory other than that of the European Economic Area (EEA) – Irrelevant  (Art. 101(1) TFEU)  (see paragraphs 56, 90-93) |

| 4. | Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Adverse effect on competition – Criteria for assessment – Content and objective of a cartel and economic and legal context of its development – Distinction between infringements by object and infringements by effect – Restricting the passive sales of video games – Infringement by object – Particularly serious infringement  (Art. 101(1) TFEU)  (see paragraphs 166-180) |

| 5. | Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Agreements between undertakings – Adverse effect on competition – Exclusive licence between the holder of intellectual property rights over video games and the undertaking distributing those video games – Additional agreement between the holder of the intellectual property rights and the distributor undertaking intended to prohibit parallel imports of those video games – Not permissible  (Art. 101(1) TFEU)  (see paragraphs 191-205) |

| 6. | Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Adverse effect on competition – Criteria for assessment – Anti-competitive object – Sufficient – Obligation to provide evidence of the existence of disadvantages for the final consumers – None – Assessment of whether there is an anti-competitive object depending on the content of the agreement and on the economic context  (Art. 101(1) TFEU)  (see paragraphs 212-220, 222, 223) |

| 7. | Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Adverse effect on competition – Criteria for assessment – Distinction between restrictions by object and by effect – Restriction by object – Whether sufficiently damaging – Assessment – Need for account to be taken of procompetitive effects that are demonstrated, relevant and intrinsic to the agreement concerned  (Art. 101(1) TFEU)  (see paragraphs 225, 226, 228, 230, 233) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Valve Corporation to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62021TJ0172_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 228, 14.6.2021](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2021:228:TOC).

[Top](#document1)