Competition Actually

The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Case C‑233/23 Alphabet and Google v AGCM (Android Auto) (the ‘Judgment’) may seem like the only possible outcome in light of recent case law on Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as had already been anticipated by Advocate General Medina in her elegant opinion (the ‘Opinion’—discussed in a previous post).

On 31 October, a couple of months before Christmas, I had already sent my Santa letter to the European Commission in response to the public consultation on the Draft Communication from the Commission—Guidelines on the application of Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings (Draft Guidelines)—see full version below.

Extra! Extra!

The Bundeskartellamt (case B6-55/20) has looked into Meta combining data from different services without the free consent required by Regulation 2016/679 (the General Data Protection Regulation, GDPR) and Meta has buried the axe in the wake of Regulation 2022/1925 (the Digital Markets Act, DMA) and its national replicants (like pioneering and bespoke Section 19a of the German competition act).

Last 10 June, the Spanish competition authority (Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia or “CNMC”) served an interesting decision on a solar power plant developer, together with an EUR 4.9 million fine, for abusing its alleged dominant position as single point of contact with the transmission system operator for access and connection to the electricity grid.