Courage Ltd v Bernard Crehan and Bernard Crehan v Courage Ltd and Others.

JurisdictionEuropean Union
Celex Number61999CJ0453
ECLIECLI:EU:C:2001:465
Date20 September 2001
CourtCourt of Justice (European Union)
Procedure TypeReference for a preliminary ruling
Docket NumberC-453/99

Judgment of the Court of 20 September 2001. - Courage Ltd v Bernard Crehan and Bernard Crehan v Courage Ltd and Others. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) - United Kingdom. - Article 85 of the EC Treaty (now Article 81 EC) - Beer tie - Leasing of public houses - Restrictive agreement - Right to damages of a party to the contract. - Case C-453/99.

European Court reports 2001 Page I-06297


Summary
Parties
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part

Keywords

1. Competition - Agreements - Contract liable to restrict or distort competition - Right of a party to the contract to rely on the breach of Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC) to obtain relief

(EC Treaty, Art. 85 (now Art. 81 EC))

2. Competition - Agreements - Contract liable to restrict or distort competition - Right of a party to the contract to claim damages for loss caused by performance of that contract - Limits

(EC Treaty, Art. 85 (now Art. 81 EC))

Summary

1. A party to a contract liable to restrict or distort competition within the meaning of Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC) can rely on the breach of that provision to obtain relief from the other contracting party.

( see para. 36 and operative part 1 )

2. The full effectiveness of Article 85 of the Treaty (now Article 81 EC) and, in particular, the practical effect of the prohibition laid down in Article 85(1) would be put at risk if it were not open to any individual to claim damages for loss caused to him by a contract or by conduct liable to restrict or distort competition. Indeed, the existence of such a right strengthens the working of the Community competition rules and discourages agreements or practices, which are frequently covert, which are liable to restrict or distort competition.

Article 85 of the Treaty therefore precludes a rule of national law under which a party to a contract liable to restrict or distort competition within the meaning of that provision is barred from claiming damages for loss caused by performance of that contract on the sole ground that the claimant is a party to that contract.

However, in the absence of Community rules governing the matter, it is for the domestic legal system of each Member State to designate the courts and tribunals having jurisdiction and to lay down the detailed procedural rules governing actions for safeguarding rights which individuals derive directly from Community law, provided that such rules are not less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (principle of equivalence) and that they do not render practically impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by Community law (principle of effectiveness).

Under those conditions, Community law does not preclude national law from denying a party who is found to bear significant responsibility for the distortion of competition the right to obtain damages from the other contracting party. Under a principle which is recognised in most of the legal systems of the Member States and which the Court has applied in the past, a litigant should not profit from his own unlawful conduct, where this is proven.

In particular, it is for the national court to ascertain whether the party who claims to have suffered loss through concluding a contract that is liable to restrict or distort competition found himself in a markedly weaker position than the other party, such as seriously to compromise or even eliminate his freedom to negotiate the terms of the contract and his capacity to avoid the loss or reduce its extent, in particular by availing himself in good time of all the legal remedies available to him.

( see paras 26-27, 29, 31, 33, 36 and operative part 2-3 )

Parties

In Case C-453/99,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Court of Appeal (England amd Wales) (Civil Division) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

Courage Ltd

and

Bernard Crehan

and between

Bernard Crehan

and

Courage Ltd and Others,

on the interpretation of Article 85 of the EC Treaty (now Article 81 EC) and other provisions of Community law,

THE COURT,

composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President, C. Gulmann, M. Wathelet (Rapporteur) and V. Skouris (Presidents of Chambers), D.A.O. Edward, P. Jann, L. Sevón, F. Macken and N. Colneric, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges,

Advocate General: J. Mischo,

Registrar: L. Hewlett, Administrator,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

- Courage Ltd, by N. Green QC, instructed by A. Molyneux, Solicitor,

- Bernard Crehan, by D. Vaughan QC and M. Brealey, Barrister, instructed by R. Croft, solicitor,

- the United Kingdom Government, by J.E. Collins, acting as Agent, and K. Parker QC,

- the French Government, by K. Rispal-Bellanger et R. Loosli-Surrans, acting as Agents,

- the Italian Government, by U. Leanza, acting as Agent,

- the Swedish Government, by L. Nordling and I. Simfors, acting as Agents,

- the Commission of the European Communities, by K. Wiedner, acting as Agent, and N. Khan, Barrister,

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of Courage Ltd, represented by N. Green and M. Gray, Barrister, of Bernard Crehan, represented by D. Vaughan and M. Brealey, of the United Kingdom Government, represented by J.E. Collins and K. Parker, and of the Commission, represented by K. Wiedner and N. Khan, at the hearing on 6 February 2001,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 22 March 2001,

gives the following

Judgment

Grounds

1 By order of 16 July 1999, received at the Court on 30 November 1999, the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC four questions on the...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
89 cases
  • Manuel Acereda Herrera v Servicio Cántabro de Salud.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 19 January 2006
    ...16; de 19 de junio de 1990, Factortame y otros (C‑213/89, Rec. p. I‑2433), apartado 19, y de 20 de septiembre de 2001, Courage y Crehan (C‑453/99, Rec. p. I‑6297), apartado 25. 22 – Véase, entre otras, la sentencia de 15 de diciembre de 1995, Bosman (C‑415/93, Rec. p. I‑4921), apartado 59. ......
  • Pia Messner v Firma Stefan Krüger.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 18 February 2009
    ...point 14); du 21 septembre 2000, Michaïlidis (C-441/98 et C-442/98, Rec. p. I-7145, point 31); du 20 septembre 2001, Courage et Crehan (C-453/99, Rec. p. I-6297, point 30), et du 13 juillet 2006, Manfredi e.a. (C-295/04 à C-298/04, Rec. p. I-6619, point 94). C’est à bon droit que la Cour au......
  • Marks & Spencer plc v Commissioners of Customs & Excise.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 13 December 2007
    ...Rec. p. 629, point 16); du 19 juin 1990, Factortame e.a. (C‑213/89, Rec. p. I‑2433, point 19); du 20 septembre 2001, Courage et Crehan (C‑453/99, Rec. p. I‑6297, point 25), et du 13 juillet 2006, Manfredi e.a. (C‑295/04 à C‑298/04, Rec. p. I‑6619, point 89). 44 – Voir, notamment, arrêts du ......
  • Stichting Cartel Compensation y Equilib Netherlands BV contra Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV y otros.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 11 November 2021
    ...maniera ben definita sia ai singoli sia gli Stati membri e alle istituzioni dell’Unione (sentenze del 20 settembre 2001, Courage e Crehan, C‑453/99, EU:C:2001:465, punto 19, e del 6 giugno 2013, Donau Chemie e a., C‑536/11, EU:C:2013:366, punto 20). 48 In tale contesto, la Corte ha già dich......
  • Get Started for Free
9 firm's commentaries
  • Facts are chiels that winna ding*
    • European Union
    • JD Supra European Union
    • 5 September 2012
    ...Court). Judgment of 26 June 2003, 2003 EWHC 1510 (Ch). 111 Courage Ltd v Bernard Crehan and Bernard Crehan v Courage Ltd and Others, Case C-453/99, 2001 ECR I 6297.whitecase.com In this publication, White & Case means the international legal practice comprising White & Case LLP, a New York ......
  • Antitrust, Competition and Economic Regulation Quarterly Newsletter - Autumn 2017
    • European Union
    • JD Supra European Union
    • 30 November 2017
    ...979 at [31]; Bundeswettbewerbsbehorde v Donau Chemie AG F°-536/11) EU:C:2013:366; [2013] 5 C.M.L.R. 19 at [34]. 10 Courage Ltd v Crehan (C-453/99) EU:C:2001:465; [2001] 3 W.L.R. 1646; [2001] 5 C.M.L.R. 28 at [26]–[27]; Manfredi v Lloyd Adriatico Assicurazioni SpA (Joined Cases C-295/04 to C......
  • Competition Litigation 2019
    • European Union
    • Mondaq European Union
    • 24 September 2018
    ...and the national courts of the EU must safeguard (Case C-127/73, BRT v SABAM, Case C-282/95 P, Guérin Automobiles v Commission, and Case C-453/99, Courage and Crehan ). In addition, the TFEU, and in particular Articles 101 and 102, have primacy over the national laws of the EU Member States......
  • Private enforcement: An overview of EU and national case law
    • European Union
    • JD Supra European Union
    • 2 July 2012
    ...This “spontaneous” harmonisation is to be welcomed. White & Case 7 Private enforcement: An overview of EU and national case law Notes 1 Case C-453/99, Courage Ltd. v. Bernard Crehan, 2001 ECR I-6297. 2 See Assimakis P. Komninos, EC Private Antitrust Enforcement, Decentralised Application of......
  • Get Started for Free
8 books & journal articles
  • La aplicación privada de la normativa europea sobre ayudas de Estado
    • European Union
    • Revista Española de Derecho Europeo No. 55, July 2015
    • 1 July 2015
    ...Common Market Law Review, nº 40, 2003, pp. 545-80, p. 550. 103. Artículo 101.2 del TFUE. 104. STJ, de 20.9.2001, as. Courage c/ Crehan (C-453/99), apartado 26. 105. Reglamento nº 17, de 21.2.1962, de aplicación de los artículos 85 y 86 del Tratado. LA APLICACIÓN PRIVADA DE LA NORMATIVA EURO......
  • La directiva 2014/104/UE y algunas de sus posibles consecuencias en el Derecho español
    • European Union
    • Revista Española de Derecho Europeo No. 56, October 2015
    • 1 October 2015
    ...colectivos de cesación e indemnización 10 . Además, la Comisión Europea ha adoptado 6. STJ, de 20-9-2001 (TJCE 2001, 237), as. Courage (C-453/99). 7. STJ, de 13-7-2006 (TJCE 2006, 204), as. Manfredi (C-295/04 a C-298/04). 8. STJ, de 14-6-2011 (TJCE 2011, 177), as. Pfleiderer (C-360/09) y ST......
  • Liability of shipowners and classification societies for environmental damage and unsafe working conditions at recycling yards
    • European Union
    • Wiley Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law No. 31-3, November 2022
    • 1 November 2022
    ...41) in relation to the Product Liability Directive 85/374 that complementsEU product safety law.61See also Wagner (n 47) 131f.62CJEU, Case C-453/99, Courage Ltd v Bernhard Crehan, ECLI:EU:C:2001:465 (Courage) para27. For further examples, see N Reich, ‘Product Liability and Beyond: An Exerc......
  • El Tahur de Luxemburgo. La jurisprudencia reciente del Tribunal de Justicia sobre juegos y apuestas
    • European Union
    • Revista Española de Derecho Europeo No. 26, April 2008
    • 1 April 2008
    ...por el ordenamiento jurídico comunitario (principio de efectividad) (véanse las sentencias de 20 de septiembre de 2001, Courage y Crehan, C-453/99, Rec. pg. I-6297, apartado 29, y de 19 de septiembre de 2006, i-21 Germany y Arcor, C-392/04 y C-422/04, Rec. pg. I-8559, apartado 57). A este r......
  • Get Started for Free