In a decision of 13 February 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) added a little gloss to an otherwise well-trodden path in relation to the binding aspects of a Commission Decision. For instance, it is well established that assessments made in recitals to a decision “are not in themselves capable of forming the subject of an application for annulment” unless they are “the necessary support for its operative part” (see Case T-138/89 Nederlandse Bankiersvereniging and Nederlandse Vereniging van Banken v Commission  ECR II-2181 at ). What of statements of position by the Commission subsequent to its Decision, e.g. in order to facilitate its enforcement at national level? Continue reading
Monthly Archives: February 2014
Is it necessary for there to be some commercial benefit to be gained by a dominant undertaking from its conduct before that conduct can be condemned as abusive?
No, says Mrs Justice Rose in Arriva the Shires Ltd v London Luton Airport Operations Ltd  EWHC 64 (Ch). Continue reading
Readers over the age of 24 do not fall into Jack Wills’ core target market, and may therefore be unfamiliar with the clothing brand’s “Mr Wills” pheasant logo:
On the other hand, those readers who are Jack Wills devotees may want to check when you get home that you have not got confused and accidentally purchased, for about the same price, a House of Fraser product adorned with this equally delightful but nonetheless different bird:
If you did get confused, it is perfectly understandable. After all, they’re both silhouettes of birds “equipped with accessories associated with an English gentleman”, as Mr Justice Arnold explained last week in Jack Wills Ltd v House of Fraser (Stores) Ltd  EWHC 110 (Ch). Continue reading