header-logo header-logo

25 October 2013
Issue: 7581 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Europe

Masco Corp and other companies v European Commission T-378/10, [2013] All ER (D) 130 (Oct)

Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) prohibited agreements and concerted practices between undertakings which had an anti-competitive object or effect and which might affect trade between member states. An infringement of Art 101(1) TFEU might result not only from isolated agreements or concerted practices which fell to be penalised as separate infringements, but also from a series of acts or from continuous conduct, the components of which might therefore justifiably be considered to be constituent elements of a single infringement. So far as concerned, in the first place, the finding of a single infringement, it was for the Commission to establish that the agreements or concerted practices in issue, although they related to distinct goods, services or territories, formed part of an overall plan knowingly implemented by the undertakings in question with a view to achieving a single anti-competitive objective. As regards, in the second place, the finding that an undertaking had participated in a single

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll