Page 138 - วารสารกฎหมาย ศาลอุทธรณ์คดีชํานัญพิเศษ

วารสารกฎหมาย ศาลอุทธรณ์คดีชำานัญพิเศษ

enables the claimant in civil litigation to bring action for damages against any legal
person belonging to the same economic entity as the perpetrator of the EU competition

law. For example, the German subsidiary of the other addressee in the same Truck Cartel
decision was also brought into action for damages against the infringement committed

by its parent company. 124
In order to reconcile with the principle of personal liability and prevent the

spillover effect of the scope of group liability regarding the single economic doctrine,
the ECJ might indicate further requirements for the attribution of one legal person to

another when they constitute a single economic entity. The third question inquired by
the referring court in case Sumal is precisely related to this consideration. One possible
additional requirement mentioned by the referring court is the “the impossibility or

extreme difficulty of enforcing liability against those found liable for the infringement
in the earlier infringement proceeding” In other words, individuals are left with a
125
heavy burden in order to bring follow-on action for damages when the addressees are

domiciled in a different Member State. The obstacle might be considered as, for example,
a considerable delay caused by difficulties of serving notice on a foreign parent company
126
or the difference in communicative language. The question derived from the requirement

is already noticed by the referring court that it is dubious whether such requirements
should be deemed as sufficient ground to justify the attribution of liability to a subsidiary

or not.
127
In addition, the introduction of further requirements could affect the methodology

of the attribution of liability not only in civil procedures but also in public procedures,
since the CJEU has confirmed that both are two-side of the same coin and the concept

of undertaking in both procedures cannot have a different scope. To illustrate, if the
128

124 Regional Court Mannheim, judgment of 24 April 2019, 14 O 117/18 Kart = NZKart 2019, 389 – Trucks
Cartel
125 Case C-882/19 Sumal, Summary of the request for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 98(1) of
the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice (working document), para 22
126 Ibid, para 23.
127 Ibid.
128 Case C-724/17 Skanska, supra (n.7), para 43-47

136