Tetra Pak v. Commission

1996 E.C.R. I-5951 (1996)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
T
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Tetra Pak v. Commission

European Union Court of Justice
1996 E.C.R. I-5951 (1996)

KL

Facts

Tetra Pak (defendant) was a company specializing in equipment for liquid packaging, including aseptic and nonaseptic packaging techniques. Tetra Pak held a 90 to 95 percent dominant position in the market for aseptic packaging, which required more sophisticated techniques than nonaseptic packaging, in which it held a 50 to 55 percent market share. Customers overlapped between the two markets. One of Tetra Pak’s competitors filed a complaint with the European Commission (the commission) (plaintiff), alleging that Tetra Pak had engaged in trading practices in violation of Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), including by selling its cartons at predatory prices in both markets. The commission agreed that Tetra Pak had infringed Article 102 of the TFEU in both the aseptic and nonaseptic markets. Tetra Pak appealed, and the general court upheld the commission’s findings. Tetra Pak appealed again, arguing that its prices in the nonaseptic market did not fall within the purview of Article 102 of the TFEU because Tetra Pak did not hold a dominant position in the nonaseptic market, nor was its conduct in the nonaseptic market intended to reinforce its position in the aseptic market in which it did hold market power.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning ()

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Antitrust

Key Terms