Knowledge-Based Limitation Period and Decisions of National Competition Authorities

By: Christian Kersting (D’KART)

In this article, author Christian Kersting analyzes Advocate General Medina’s opinion in the Nissan Iberia case, which explores the applicability of the European Court of Justice’s (Heureka) case law on limitation periods for competition law damages claims to decisions issued by national competition authorities (NCAs). The Heureka ruling had established that the limitation period generally begins upon the publication of the Commission’s decision summary in the Official Journal. Medina’s opinion considers whether similar principles apply when decisions come from NCAs and are only published on their websites, not in the Official Journal.

The questions referred to the ECJ in Nissan Iberia were initially unclear, prompting the Advocate General to reformulate them for clarity. She identified the core issues as whether national legislation can validly delay the start of the limitation period until a competition authority’s decision becomes final or is published online, and whether the Heureka standard can be applied to NCA decisions. Kersting notes that while the second part accurately reflects the case’s focus, the first part misrepresents the referring court’s real concern, which is what European law requires, not merely what it allows.

Kersting critiques Medina’s proposed answer for its ambiguity. While she correctly insists that the NCA decision must be final and legally binding before the limitation period can begin, she frames her response in permissive terms—stating that EU law does not preclude such national rules—rather than affirming a specific EU-law-mandated outcome. This wording opens the door to multiple interpretations and potentially contradictory national approaches, which Kersting argues is likely not what Medina intended…

CONTINUE READING…