A new chapter in the Intel-EU affair opens. The European Court of Justice has in fact decided to refer back to the General Court the review of the decision with which the European Commission imposed a fine of 1,06 billion euros to the technology company, in 2009 for abuse of dominant position. "The case is being remanded to the Tribunal to consider Intel's arguments." In 2014, the EU Court of Justice had initially validated the community fine.
In the note with which the EU Court of Justice informs of the choice to annul the sentence of the General Court which had confirmed the 1,06 billion euro fine imposed on Intel by the Commission for abuse of a dominant position, the 'judicial' history of the case. The European Antitrust fine was imposed because the group had, according to Brussels, abused its dominant position in the x86 processor market, in breach of the competition rules of the European Union and the European Economic Area. According to the Commission, Intel abused its dominant position on the worldwide market for x86 processors between October 2002 and December 2007 by implementing a strategy aimed at ousting its only effective competitor, Advanced Micro Devices, from the market. According to Community calculations, Intel occupied a dominant position as it held about 70% or more of the market shares and it was extremely difficult for competitors to enter and develop on the market due to the sunk nature of the investments in research and development. in intellectual property and manufacturing facilities.
The company's appeal was rejected three years ago by the EU Court, hence the appeal before the Court of Justice: according to Intel, the General Court in particular erred in law by failing to examine the disputed rebates in the light of all the circumstances of the case. Today the Court recalls that the Court had accepted the Commission's argument according to which loyalty rebates granted by a company in a dominant position have, by their very nature, the ability to limit competition, so that a 'analysis of all the circumstances of the case nor', in particular, carry out an AEC test (acronym for 'as efficient competitor test')
However, the Court also stated that the General Court "was required to examine all the arguments formulated by Intel in relation to this test (such as, in particular, the errors that the Commission allegedly made in relation to this test), which the Court ' refrained from doing”. Referral of the case to the Tribunal it is intended to allow the assessment of the ability of the rebates to limit competition "in the light of the arguments put forward by Intel".
