Increasing interim measure use stirs consequences debate

Sarah Long commented to PaRR analytics on the increased use of interim measures, cautioning that despite the CMA’s recognition that the tool should be used more, the legal test remains relatively difficult to meet, and interim measures have never been successfully applied in the UK.  The CMA cites the Online Auction Platform case (which Euclid Law advised on) as an example of a successful interim measures case in its 2018/2018 annual report, although the case was closed after commitments were offered so there was no interim measures decision.  You can read Sarah’s article – co-authored with Simon Chisholm (CRA) and Helen Parker (UK Auctioneers Group) – here.

The Android choice screen

Has google “ducked” the EU remedy?

a CLI article by Oliver Bretz and Marie Leppard

In 2018, the European Commission found that Google abused its dominant position by imposing various restrictions on the Android operating system in order to entrench and promote its own search engine. In short, Google’s practices had denied rival search engines the possibility to compete on merits. The tying practices ensured the pre-installation of Google’s search engine and browser on practically all Google Android devices, and the exclusivity payments strongly reduced the incentive to pre-install competing search engines. Google had also obstructed the development of Android forks, which could have provided a platform for rival search engines to gain traffic.

To read the rest of this article please follow the link to CLI (Competition Law Insights)