EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-260/24, LUKOIL Bulgaria: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-oblast (Bulgaria) lodged on 15 April 2024 – LUKOIL Bulgaria EOOD v Komisia za zashtita na konkurentsiata

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0260

62024CN0260

April 15, 2024
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

Official Journal of the European Union

C series

C/2024/3748

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-oblast (Bulgaria) lodged on 15 April 2024 – ‘LUKOIL Bulgaria’ EOOD v Komisia za zashtita na konkurentsiata

(Case C-260/24, LUKOIL Bulgaria)

(C/2024/3748)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: ‘LUKOIL Bulgaria’ EOOD

Defendant: Komisia za zashtita na konkurentsiata

Questions referred

1.Must Article 102 TFEU and the principles of the rights of the defence, legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations, including the presumption of innocence, be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of an unlawful margin squeeze, the relevant markets (the markets in which the infringement was committed) are two vertically related markets, namely an upstream market and a downstream market, and that it is precisely in relation to those two relevant markets that the competition authority is required, when making the accusation and adopting the final decision, to make statements of fact relating to the size of those markets, the participants in those markets and the market shares of those participants, including the market shares of the undertaking to which it imputes a dominant position on those markets?

2.Must Article 102 TFEU, interpreted in conjunction with the principles of the rights of the defence, legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations, including the presumption of innocence, be interpreted as meaning that, in proceedings under Article 102 TFEU, that article does not allow products between which there is neither demand-side nor supply-side substitutability to be included in one and the same national product market, as the KZK did in the present case by including diesel fuel and A-95H petrol in a single product market for motor fuels?

3.If it is permissible to include in a single national product market motor fuels between which there is no demand-side or supply-side substitutability, is it permissible not to include in the product market for motor fuels the third main motor fuel in the national market, namely propane/butane gas (LPG), which has a market share in the national market that is equal to the market share of petrol?

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3748/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia