CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 14 September 2017; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and relevant/related cases. Case facts Outline Appeal to the General Court seeking annulment of the Commission decision of 9 October 2015 rejecting a complaint brought by Contact Software which alleged that Dassault Systèmes and PTC abused their dominant position on the market for computer-aided-design (CAD) software by refusing to provide interoperability information for product data management (PDM) software. The General Court concluded that the Commission did not commit any errors in determining that the complaint should be rejected, particular in relation to market definition and the alleged abuse, and, further, did provide sufficient reasoning for its decision. Latest developments On 14 September 2017, the General Court issued its judgment, dismissing in its entirety an action for annulment of the decision of the European Commission to reject a complaint by Contact Software GmbH alleging that Dassault Systèmes and PTC abused a dominant position on the market for computer-aided

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 8 July 2020; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline and relevant/related cases Case facts Outline Referral back to the General Court following the Court of Justice’s judgment in Case C- 99/17 P Infineon Technologies v Commission (Smart card chip cartel), which was an appeal against the General Court’s judgment upholding the Commission’s decision of 3 September 2014 (Case AT.39226) which found an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and imposed fines on Infineon for its alleged participation in a cartel for the supply of smart card chips. Outcome On 8 July 2020, the General Court issued its judgment in which it partially upheld Infineon’s appeal. Parties Applicant:• Infineon Technologies AG (Infineon)Defendant: • European Commission Infineon, based in Germany, is a semiconductor manufacturer active in the supply of smart card chips. Market(s) The supply of smart card chips in the EEA. Smart card chips are used in mobile telephone SIM cards, bank cards, identity cards

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 15 September 2016; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and relevant/related cases Case facts Outline Appeal to the General Court seeking annulment of the Commission's decision of 20 December 2012 accepting commitments proposed by Thomson Reuters with a view to remedying concerns raised by the Commission that Thomson Reuters was, contrary to Article 102 TFEU, abusing its dominant position in the market for consolidated real-time datafeeds through licensing practices.  On 15 September 2016, the General Court dismissed the action in its entirety—concluding, amongst other things, that the commitments proposed by Thomson Reuters were correctly assessed as being capable of resolving the concerns identified by the Commission and that the Commission did not, as such, commit a manifest error of assessment in accepting these commitments. Article 9 Regulation (EC) 1/2003 provides the Commission the power to accept legally binding ‘commitments’ from undertakings for the purpose of resolving EU antitrust cases. When accepting Article 9 commitments, the

CASE HUB NOTE—appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case C- 933/19 P ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 24 October 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline Case T- 778/17 Autostrada Wielkopolska v Commission—an action for annulment of the European Commission’s decision finding that aid awarded by Poland to AWSA, the operator of the A2 motorway, was illegal and should be repaid (Case SA.35356). Latest developments On 24 October 2019, the General Court issued its judgment in which it dismissed the action. Parties Applicant:• Autostrada Wielkopolska S.A. (AWSA), a Polish company that operated the A2 motorway in Poland Defendant:• European Commission Background The aid granted In August 2012, Poland notified the Commission that it had overcompensated AWSA for loss in revenue resulting from a change in national legislation on toll motorways between 1 September 2005 and 30 June 2011. the overpayment related to a change in Polish law, introduced in 2005, to exempt heavy goods vehicles with

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 11 December 2013; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and relevant cases. Case facts Outline Appeal by Cisco Systems and Messagenet against the Commission clearance decision of 7 October 2011 approving (without conditions) Microsoft Corporation's acquisition of Skype. Parties Applicants:• Cisco Systems Inc • Messagenet SpA  Defendant: European Commission Background On 7 October 2011, the Commission cleared (without conditions) Microsoft's acquisition of Skype. Microsoft is primarily active in the design, development and supply of computer software, operating systems and related services while Skype provides communications services (instant messaging, voice, and video communication) over the Internet. The Commission concluded that:• the acquisition did not raise competition concerns as the parties' activities mainly overlapped in the video communications market(s) in which there are numerous players active; and• Skype had a limited market presence in enterprise communications and did not compete directly with Microsoft's enterprise communication product. The Commission also examined conglomerate effects, particularly the

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 9 February 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and commentary Case facts Outline An action for annulment before the General Court of the European Commission’s decision of 12 August 2019 which rejected a complaint lodged by a Polish shipping company against a State-owned company for abusing its dominant position on the market for rail freight transport services in Poland (AT.40459). Latest developments On 2 February 2022, the General Court issued its judgment in which it upheld the appeal. In particular, the General Court ruled (amongst other things) that [x] Parties Applicants:• Sped-Pro S.A. (the ‘Applicant’)Defendant:• European Commission (the ‘Commission’) Background Background In the context of the exercise of activities in the forwarding services sector, the Applicant used rail freight transport services supplied by PKP Cargo S.A—a company controlled by the Polish State. Complaint On 4 November 2016, the Applicant lodged a complaint against PKP Cargo before the Commission. In that complaint, it submitted that

CASE HUB NOTE—appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case C- 251/22 ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 2 February 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline Appeal to the General Court of the European Commission decision fining Scania into an alleged cartel in the market for medium duty trucks (AT.39824). Latest development On 2 February 2022, the General Court issued its judgment in which it dismissed the appeal in its entirety. In particular, the General Court held (amongst other things) that: (i) the Commission had not breached the presumption of innocence by using the ‘hybrid’ procedure; (ii) there was no infringement of Scania’s presumption of innocence or right of defence; and (iii) the Commission had established to the requisite legal standard that the information exchanges of concern formed part of an overall plan with the single anti-competitive objective of restricting competition in the relevant truck markets. Parties Applicants:• Scania AB Scania CV AB and Scania

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 19 December 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline Case T- 812/14 RENV BPC Lux 2 and Others v Commission—an action for annulment of the European Commission’s decision not to raise objections to aid granted by Portuguese authorities for the resolution of Banco Espirito Santo SA (Case SA.39250) that was remitted back to the General Court following the Court of Justice’s judgment in Case C- 544/17. Latest developments On 19 December 2019, the General Court issued its judgment in which it dismissed the action as being inadmissible. Parties Applicants:• BPC Lux 2 Sàrl (as well as various other legal persons) (hereafter, BPC) are subordinated creditors of Banco Espírito Santo (BES), holding Lower Tier 2 Bonds.Defendant:• European Commission Background In May 2014, an audit carried out by the Banco de Portugal (Bank of Portugal) of the Espírito Santo International SA Group (ESIG) concluded that BPC was in a serious financial condition,

CASE HUB NOTE—appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case C- 42/21. ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 18 November 2020; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline and relevant/related cases. Case facts Outline Appeal to the General Court seeking annulment and/or reduction in the level of fine regarding the European Commission’s decision of 2 October 2017 finding an infringement of Article 102 and imposing a fine of €27,873,000 on AB Lietuvos geležinkeliai for dismantling a 19km long section of railway track connecting Lithuania and Latvia (AT.39813). Outcome On 18 November 2020, the General Court issued its judgment in which it substantively dismissed the appeal in its entirety. While finding no errors in the Commission’s imposition of a fine, in the exercise of its unlimited jurisdiction to set the amount of fines, the General Court reduced the fine from €27,873,000 to €20,068,650 having regard to the gravity and duration of the infringement. Parties Applicant:• AB Lietuvos geležinkeliai (LG): LG is the incumbent

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 12 December 2018; it is no longer maintained. NOTE—appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case C- 132/19 P See further, timeline, commentary and related cases. Case facts Outline Appeal to the General Court of the European Commission’s decision to accept commitments from Paramount Pictures in the investigation into Cross-border access to pay-TV (Case AT.40023). Latest development On 12 December 2018, the General Court issued its judgment, in which it dismissed the action for annulment, thereby upholding the Commission’s decision to accept commitments from Paramount. The General Court confirmed that a decision to accept commitments under Article 9 should set out the Commission’s competition concerns and explain why the commitments accepted address those concerns and that there are no less extensive proposed commitments that would also satisfy the concerns. Parties Applicant: Groupe Canal + (Canal +) is a French film and television studio and distributor. It is owned and controlled by Vivendi. Defendant:

CASE HUB ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 13 July 2022; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline. Case facts Outline An appeal to the General Court against the European Commission’s decision of 25 October 2019 to reject a complaint relating to alleged breach of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU by Koninklijke Philips N.V. as a result of its licensing practices in the LED lighting sector (AT.39913). Latest developments On 13 July 2022, the General Court issued its judgment in which it dismissed the appeal in its entirety. The General Court held (amongst other things) that the Commission did not: (i) unlawfully exercise its discretion in deciding not to conduct a more extensive investigation into the alleged infringements that were the subject of the complaint; and (ii) commit a manifest error of assessment or an error of law in taking the view, in the exercise of its discretionary

CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 10 December 2014; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant cases Case facts Outline Appeal to the General Court seeking annulment or reduction in the level of fine imposed regarding the Commission's decision of 8 December 2010 finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and imposing a fine of €5m on Ordre national des pharmaciens (ONP) and its governing bodies for their alleged imposition of minimum prices on the French market for clinical laboratory tests and for hindering the development of groups of laboratories in the French market between October 2003 and September 2007. On 10 December 2014, the General Court confirmed the Commission’s decision but ordered a marginal reduction in fine from €5m to €4.75m.The case focuses on, amongst other things, on the application of the competition rules to public (or quasi public) bodies. Parties Applicants: • Ordre national des pharmaciens (ONP)• Conseil national de l'ordre des pharmaciens