Intel Corp v Commission
Where a dominant undertaking submits evidence that its rebates were not capable of restricting competition, the Commission must examine their capacity to foreclose as efficient competitors.
Facts
The European Commission fined Intel over one billion euros for abusing its dominant position in the market for x86 computer processors, by granting conditional rebates to computer manufacturers and a retailer on condition that they bought all or almost all of their processors from Intel, and by making payments to manufacturers to delay or cancel the launch of products with competing processors. The General Court upheld the decision, holding that exclusivity rebates were abusive by their nature.
Legal principle
The Court of Justice set aside the General Court's judgment. The court said that article 102 does not seek to ensure that competitors less efficient than the dominant undertaking remain on the market, and that, where the undertaking submits, on the basis of supporting evidence, that its conduct was not capable of restricting competition and producing the alleged foreclosure effects, the Commission must analyse the extent of the undertaking's dominant position, the share of the market covered by the practice, the conditions and duration of the rebates, and the possible existence of a strategy aiming to exclude competitors that are at least as efficient. The General Court later annulled the decision in part, and the Commission readopted a fine for the naked restrictions.
Related cases on dominance and exclusionary abuse
- Europemballage Corp and Continental Can Co Inc v Commission Case 6/72, [1973] ECR 215
- Google LLC and Alphabet Inc v Commission (Google Shopping) Case C-48/22 P, EU:C:2024:726
- Hoffmann-La Roche & Co AG v Commission Case 85/76, [1979] ECR 461
- Meta Platforms Inc v Bundeskartellamt Case C-252/21, EU:C:2023:537
- Microsoft Corp v Commission Case T-201/04, [2007] ECR II-3601
- Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings Ltd v Director General of Fair Trading [2002] CAT 1, [2002] Comp AR 13
- Nederlandsche Banden-Industrie Michelin NV v Commission (Michelin I) Case 322/81, [1983] ECR 3461
- Post Danmark A/S v Konkurrencerådet (Post Danmark I) Case C-209/10, EU:C:2012:172
Studying competition law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
