Key Diary Dates
- Monday, 21 October: The European Parliament’s environment committee is set to vote on its stance regarding the upcoming climate COP29, which will take place in Baku, Azerbaijan, from 11 to 22 November 2024.
- Tuesday, 22 & Wednesday, 23 October: Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) will engage in debates and subsequent voting on the 2025 EU budget, as they push back against the Council’s proposal to cut €1.52 billion from vital EU programs such as Horizon Europe and Erasmus+.
- Thursday, 24 October: A crucial judgment from the European Court of Justice regarding the Intel case is expected to be delivered.
In the Spotlight
The judicial saga involving Intel reaches a pivotal moment this Thursday, tracing its origins back to 2009 when the European Commission imposed a substantial fine of €1.06 billion on the American multinational chip manufacturer. The charges against Intel centered on allegations of abusing its dominant position by offering rebate schemes to major computer companies such as Dell, Hewlett-Packard Co, NEC, and Lenovo, contingent upon their exclusive purchase of its x86 CPU chips.
These rebate schemes were said to have stifled competition, particularly impacting rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), as pointed out by EU antitrust regulators. At the time, the fine represented the highest ever levied by the European Commission—a record that was later eclipsed by the €4.34 billion penalty imposed on Google in 2018 for similar antitrust violations.
Initially, Intel’s appeal against the fine was rejected by the General Court, Europe’s second-highest tribunal, in 2014. However, a later challenge led the Court of Justice to refer the case back to the General Court for a fresh examination in 2017. In a significant turn of events in 2022, the General Court ruled in favor of Intel, annulling the Commission’s decision to impose the €1.06 billion penalty, citing that the Commission’s analysis was insufficiently comprehensive. The judges concluded that the Commission failed to demonstrate that the rebate schemes in question were capable of producing anticompetitive effects, thus challenging the presumption that fidelity rebates could effectively foreclose competition.
This ruling sent shockwaves through the EU’s antitrust enforcement community, indicating that future decisions would require meticulous and detailed economic analyses. The upcoming ruling from the Court this week will not only address the Commission’s appeal but also shed light on the standards that the European Commission must apply when assessing rebate schemes as potential abuses of dominance. Legal experts and corporate stakeholders are poised to closely examine the Court’s reasoning, particularly regarding the implications for the Commission’s “effects-based” approach and the extent of economic scrutiny required in future antitrust investigations.
Policy Newsmakers
In recent developments, the European Parliament has appointed Michael McNamara and Brando Benifei to lead the AI monitoring group, which is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the AI Act. McNamara, representing Ireland and the Renew Europe group, will serve as co-chair for the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), while Benifei, from Italy and the Socialists and Democrats (S&D) group, will co-chair on behalf of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO).
