Antitrust
The limitation period for follow-on actions based on CNMC decisions starts running once the decision becomes final
A recent ruling by the CJEU concludes that, in this type of actions, the limitation period only begins when the decision is final and has been properly published, since, before that happens, the injured parties do not have the information necessary to claim. According to the court, the opposite would make it excessively difficult to exercise the right to compensation and would violate the principle of effectiveness. We analyze the ruling and the various questions that this ruling raises.Mexico approves a new regulatory regime on economic competition
With the approval of this reform to the Federal Economic Competition Law, Mexico moves toward a profound transformation of its legal framework in this area. This new stage aims to align secondary legislation with recent constitutional changes, strengthen the authority in charge, and provide it with greater tools to prevent, investigate, and sanction anticompetitive practices—thereby promoting a more dynamic, transparent, and equitable economy.CJEU: a parent company may, 'a priori', be sued in its country for competition infringements committed by its subsidiaries in other Member States
In a relevant judgment on the application of competition law at the European level, the CJEU confirms that, in competition matters, the "presumption of decisive influence" of a parent company over its subsidiary in competition matters allows, in the context of a follow-on action, both entities to be jointly sued in the Member State where the parent company is established.The CJEU establishes the limits that a Member State cannot cross by restricting those damaged by an antitrust infringement from giving up their right to be compensated
In a recent judgment, the CJEU establishes that a national rule that prevents those damaged by an antitrust infringement from assigning their right to compensation would be contrary to Articles 101 of the TFEU and 47 of the Charter of Rights of the European Union when: (i) the law of that State does not provide for other possibilities of grouping the individual claims of those damaged by an infringement of competition; and (ii) the exercise of individual actions for damages by the damaged parties is impossible or excessively difficult.Control of foreign investments in Spain: the transitional regime for investments made by EU and EFTA residents is extended until December 31, 2026
Foreign investments in Spain carried out by residents of the European Union and the Spanish Free Trade Association will continue to be subject to the prior authorization regime established in Article 7 bis of Law 19/2003.Peru: Indecopi cleared 45 filings and rejected 1 in the first three years of its Antitrust Merger Control Regime
Garrigues and the Official Chamber of Commerce of Spain in Peru (COCEP) have published a new report analyzing the first three years of the merger control regime for business transactions in Peru.The CJEU rejects the parent company's right to claim damages suffered by its subsidiaries in other countries before the courts of its registered office
A judgment of the CJEU concludes that, in claims for damages caused by infringement of competition law, it is not possible to rely on the principle of economic unity to interpret the forum of the "place where the harmful event occurred" as being the place where the parent company has its registered office when the affected parties are subsidiaries located in other Member States.Truck cartel: the Supreme Court assesses (and rejects) an expert report submitted in hundreds of legal proceedings that has led to contradictory rulings by different courts
In a new batch of judgments, the High Court confirms its doctrine in relation to the judicial estimation of the damage in this type of claims, extending it now to a series of cases which were accompanied by a specific expert report which, although more sophisticated than those provided by the plaintiffs in the cases analyzed by the Supreme Court in its judgments relating to the so-called first wave, is still insufficient to accredit the amount of the damage.Spanish Courts grant precautionary measures against FIFA and the Royal Spanish Football Federation regarding fee caps imposed on football agents
In a judicial proceeding under the legal direction of Garrigues, the Commercial Court No. 3 of Madrid has issued an interim injunction ordering FIFA to refrain from applying the cap on football agents’ fees introduced by a recent FIFA Regulation and the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) to refrain from incorporating this cap into its internal regulations.