Iiyama (UK) Limited & Ors. v Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Iiyama (UK) Limited & Ors. v Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. & Ors.

The Court of Appeal held that the territorial scope of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA includes worldwide cartel conduct intended to affect the EU/EEA market, provided the qualified effects test (immediate, foreseeable, substantial effects) is satisfied. The claimants' cases are at least arguable and should proceed to trial; summary judgment or strike out is inappropriate. Service out of jurisdiction and forum are proper. The Intel decision confirms the qualified effects doctrine as an alternative to the implementation test. The claims are governed by English or EU law, and causation and joint and several liability issues must be determined at trial.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: IIYAMA (UK) LIMITED; Appellant/claimant: IIYAMA DEUTSCHLAND GMBH; Appellant/claimant: IIYAMA BENELUX BV; Appellant/claimant: IIYAMA POLSKA SP Z. O. O.; Appellant/claimant: IIYAMA FRANCE S. A. R. L.; Appellant/claimant: MOUSE COMPUTERS CO. LIMITED; Respondent/defendant: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.; Respondent/defendant: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LIMITED; Respondent/defendant: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS (UK) LIMITED; Respondent/defendant: SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR EUROPE LIMITED; Respondent/defendant: LG DISPLAY CO. LTD.; Respondent/defendant: SAMSUNG SDI CO LTD; Respondent/defendant: SAMSUNG SDI (MALAYSIA) BERHAD; Respondent/defendant: LG ELECTRONICS INC; Respondent/defendant: LG ELECTRONICS UK LIMITED; Respondent/defendant: LG ELECTRONICS WALES LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION); Respondent/defendant: KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS NV; Respondent/defendant: PHILIPS ELECTRONICS UK LIMITED
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Interlocutory Appeals (summary Judgment/strike Out, Jurisdiction/service Out)
Outcome
Appeals allowed; claims reinstated; summary judgment/strike out orders set aside; permission to amend granted; service out orders restored; forum England and Wales confirmed.
Legal Topics
Territorial Scope of Article 101 TFEU, Qualified Effects Doctrine, Implementation Test, Jurisdiction and Service Out, Choice of Law, Joint and Several Liability, Causation, Forum Conveniens
Competition Law Private International Law Civil Procedure Territorial Scope of Article 101 TFEU Qualified Effects Doctrine Implementation Test Jurisdiction and Service Out Choice of Law +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IIYAMA (UK) LIMITED

Appellant/claimant

IIYAMA DEUTSCHLAND GMBH

Appellant/claimant

IIYAMA BENELUX BV

Appellant/claimant

IIYAMA POLSKA SP Z. O. O.

Appellant/claimant

IIYAMA FRANCE S. A. R. L.

Appellant/claimant

MOUSE COMPUTERS CO. LIMITED

Appellant/claimant

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.

Respondent/defendant

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS LIMITED

Respondent/defendant

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS (UK) LIMITED

Respondent/defendant

SAMSUNG SEMICONDUCTOR EUROPE LIMITED

Respondent/defendant

LG DISPLAY CO. LTD.

Respondent/defendant

SAMSUNG SDI CO LTD

Respondent/defendant

SAMSUNG SDI (MALAYSIA) BERHAD

Respondent/defendant

LG ELECTRONICS INC

Respondent/defendant

LG ELECTRONICS UK LIMITED

Respondent/defendant

LG ELECTRONICS WALES LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)

Respondent/defendant

KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS NV

Respondent/defendant

PHILIPS ELECTRONICS UK LIMITED

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Interlocutory Appeals (summary Judgment/strike Out, Jurisdiction/service Out)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does Article 101 TFEU and/or Article 53 EEA apply to worldwide cartel conduct affecting products supplied outside the EU/EEA but ultimately sold within the EU/EEA?
  2. 2 Can losses suffered by EU/EEA claimants from inflated prices due to worldwide cartels be recovered in English proceedings?
  3. 3 What is the proper test for territorial jurisdiction: implementation or qualified effects?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the territorial scope of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 EEA includes worldwide cartel conduct intended to affect the EU/EEA market, provided the qualified effects test (immediate, foreseeable, substantial effects) is satisfied. The claimants' cases are at least arguable and should proceed to trial; summary judgment or strike out is inappropriate. Service out of jurisdiction and forum are proper. The Intel decision confirms the qualified effects doctrine as an alternative to the implementation test. The claims are governed by English or EU law, and causation and joint and several liability issues must be determined at trial.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; claims reinstated; summary judgment/strike out orders set aside; permission to amend granted; service out orders restored; forum England and Wales confirmed.

Orders

  • Claims in both CRT and LCD Actions to proceed to trial.
  • Summary judgment and strike out orders reversed.