Warianty tytułu
Działalność administratora platformy obsługującej rezerwacje a uzgodniona praktyka firm korzystających z platformy - komentarz do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości w sprawie C-74/14 "Eturas" i inni p-ko Najwyższy sąd administracyjny Litwy
Języki publikacji
Abstrakty
The Court's judgement clarifies competition assessment of certain activity of the administrator of an online booking platform acting as specific ''coordinator'' of the businesses of companies using that platform and also competing with each other. When such administrator sends to companies, via a personal electronic mailbox, a message informing them that the discounts on products sold through online system are capped, the operators may be presumed to have participated in a concerted practice if they are aware of that message. The Court's ruling also clarifies that proving the awareness of the message being sent is sufficient to establish the concerted practice within the meaning of art. 101 of the Treaty. The Court also cleared factors under which that presumption can be rebutted: the companies can publicly distance themselves from that practice, report it to the administrative authorities or provide other evidence, such as systematic offer of a discount exceeding the ''agreed-upon'' cap. As to the third factor, it is worth mentioning that as to date, courts have not treated noncompliance with an illegal practice as an evidence of that an undertaking did not participate in the agreement. What is also important, the Court's ruling clarified that - because of the principle of the presumption of innocence - the mere sending of the message does not constitute sufficient evidence to establish that its addressees ought to have been aware of its content. It can constitute such an evidence only in view of all the circumstances. The undertaking can prove e.g. not receiving, not reading or even looking at the message until some time had passed. If they prove that - it means they did not participate in the conduct. From the perspective of the company present on an online booking platform together with its competitors, the judgement means that to guarantee that it is not presumed participant to an anticompetitive concerted practice, the company: (a) should be aware that in some circumstances even unilateral acts of the administrator of the platform can be qualified as sufficient evidence of the illegal concerted practice, (b) should systematically analyze the content of mes- sages sent by its administrator to the companies that use the online platform, (c) should react rapidly and clearly when such messages contain any invitation to anticompetitive coordination of conduct, for instance clearly distancing from any anticompetitive proposals.(original abstract)
Twórcy
autor
- Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Bibliografia
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171656126
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.