Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 March 2021 – Arrow Group and Arrow Generics v Commission
(Case C‑601/16 P) ( 1 )
(Appeal – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Pharmaceutical products – Market for antidepressant medicines (citalopram) – Settlement agreements concerning process patents concluded between a manufacturer of originator medicines holding those patents and manufacturers of generic medicines – Article 101 TFEU – Potential competition – Restriction by object – Characterisation – Calculation of the amount of the fine)
|
1. |
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Adverse effect on competition – Criteria for assessment – Description of an undertaking as a potential competitor – Real or concrete possibilities of entering the market – Criteria – Firm intention and inherent ability of the undertaking to enter the relevant market – Sufficient preparatory steps to enter the relevant market – No insurmountable barrier – Assessment – Existence of a process patent (Art. 101(1) TFEU) (see paras 38-48, 52, 53, 55) |
|
2. |
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Adverse effect on competition – Criteria for assessment – Distinction between restrictions by object and by effect – Restriction by object – Sufficient degree of harmfulness – Assessment (Art. 101(1) TFEU) (see para. 71) |
|
3. |
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Adverse effect on competition – Amicable agreement on patents – Agreement concluded between an originator company and a generic medicine undertaking – Agreement to delay the entry of the manufacturer of generic medicines into the relevant market – Consideration consisting in transfers of value – Characterisation of a restriction by object – Criteria – Assessment of whether transfers of value act as an incentive to refraining from entering the market (Art. 101(1) TFEU) (see paras 72-78, 86, 87) |
|
4. |
Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Adverse effect on competition – Amicable agreement on patents – Agreement concluded between an originator company and a generic medicine undertaking – Agreement to delay the entry of the manufacturer of generic medicines into the relevant market – Characterisation of a restriction by object – Criteria – Examination of the counterfactual scenario – Irrelevant (Art. 101(1) TFEU) (see paras 84, 85, 88) |
|
5. |
Competition – EU rules – Infringements – Committed intentionally or negligently – Meaning – Undertaking not capable of being unaware of the anti-competitive nature of its conduct – Agreement concluded between an originator company and a generic medicine undertaking – Included (Art. 101 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47; Council Regulation No 1/2003, Art. 5(2), 23(2)) (see paras 97-99) |
Operative part
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the appeal. |
|
2. |
Orders Arrow Group ApS and Arrow Generics Ltd to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
|
3. |
Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear its own costs. |
( 1 ) OJ C 30, 30.1.2017.