EU antitrust - Article 102 TFEU

Dominance

Article 102 TFEU prohibits undertakings that (individually or collectively) hold a dominant position within the EU or a substantial part of it from abusing their dominance (without objective justification) insofar as it may affect trade between Member States. This provision is mirrored in the national competition laws of EU Member States and which can apply even where an effect on inter-state trade is not established.

The distinction between abusive and legitimate (permissible) conduct by a dominant undertaking may be hard to discern—for example, a price reduction resulting from production efficiencies/economies as opposed to a ‘predatory’ price cut. Dominant undertakings are permitted (and indeed expected) to compete aggressively on a given market but such behaviour should reflect competition ‘on the merits’.

The application of Article 102 TFEU has three constituent elements:

•
establishing ‘dominance’
•
confirming prima facie restrictive unilateral conduct, and
•
assessing whether there is ‘objective justification’ for any such conduct—if not (and only then) can the conduct in question legally be construed as an ‘abuse’

For further information, see Practice Notes: Article 102 TFEU—the prohibition on abuse of dominance and Dominant position

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest EU Law News

Automated decision-making and DSARs: right to access means a right to explainability (CK v Magistrat Der Stadt Wiendun & Bradstreet Austria GMBH)

Information Law analysis: The Court of Justice provided several clarifications around the scope of data subject access requests (DSARs) in the context of automated decision-making. The court held the determining factor for whether information constitutes ‘meaningful information about the logic involved’ under Article 15(1)(h) of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR) is whether the information enables the data subject to understand the logic involved in automated decision-making involving their personal data. The court also held disclosure by controllers should be underpinned by the principles of transparency, which requires information to be clear, accessible and intelligible, both in terms of content and form, from the perspective of data subjects. In the context of automated decision-making this doesn’t necessarily mean providing the exact algorithm, if it doesn’t help the data subject’s understanding of the ‘how’. The court confirmed DSARs do not mandate the disclosure of trade secrets, but this can only be decided by the relevant supervisory authority or competent court, after assessing all relevant information provided to them by a controller. The protection of trade secrets cannot be used as a blanket excuse by businesses to withhold certain information from individuals making a request under Article 15(1)(h) of the EU GDPR. Written by Marija Nonkovic, associate at Kemp IT Law LLP.

Commission proposes measures to support wine sector

The European Commission has proposed a series of measures to maintain the competitiveness and resilience of Europe's wine sector. The proposal includes targeted measures to manage production capacity, adapt to consumer preferences, and explore new market opportunities. These measures also aim to maintain the economic vitality of rural areas dependent on wine industry employment.

Court of Justice urged to uphold €60m Teva pay-for-delay fine

Law360, London: An adviser to the Court of Justice said on 27 March 2025 that it should uphold €60.5m in fines against Teva and its subsidiary Cephalon for an alleged conspiracy to keep a generic version of Provigil off the shelves.

Commission reviews Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority operations

The European Commission has published a review of the Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority (HERA) on 27 March 2025, examining its operations since establishment in September 2021. The review assesses HERA's effectiveness in strengthening EU health security through medical countermeasure development, production and distribution. With €6bn funding through 2027, HERA coordinates threat assessment, research, stockpiling and crisis response. The review identifies areas for improvement including clearer delineation of responsibilities with other EU bodies and more tailored funding mechanisms. The Commission maintains HERA should remain an internal service rather than becoming a separate agency.