The case targeted on claims that Intel had abused their dominant position in the microchip market.
In its ruling today, the European Court of Justice found that the General Court had missed a few things, including addressing Intel's criticisms of the test. That could make it harder for the commission when it seeks to lodge another such antitrust case.
They did so by making the products of a hypothetical as-efficient competitor more expensive without the rebates than Intel's with the rebates. As a result, it may also unintentionally make rules for compliance murkier.
"The case is referred back to the General Court in order for it to examine the arguments put forward by Intel concerning the capacity of the rebates at issue to restrict competition".
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has now ruled that the case should be sent back to a lower court to be re-examined.
Latest North Korean missile test continues to strain global relations
So the question is whether North Korea will put some checks on itself as it seeks to expand its weapons tests in the Pacific. Still, it's unclear whether the North will ever act on its threat to fire missiles at the "advanced base of invasion".
"This is certainly a defeat for the European Commission and indicates a certain relaxation of the formalistic case law on abuse of dominance", he said in a statement.
The Advocate General released a non-binding opinion (PDF) that the General Court should get a fresh review in 2016.
Intel didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Intel had given the rebates to computer manufacturers, presumably to keep them from using AMD chips. The EU also said Intel made payments to electronics retailer Media Saturn Holding on the condition that it only sold computers containing Intel's microprocessors.
Intel has long fought back against the ruling, arguing that European Union judges failed to analyse "all relevant circumstances" to see whether the rebates shut out rivals including AMD.
The European Court of Justice was critical of the lower court's lack of consideration of Intel's arguments about competition and lack of scrutiny of the underlying facts. The court in 2014 backed the commission's first argument that dominant companies' rebates are by nature potentially anticompetitive-a decision Intel then appealed to the ECJ.
- LSU defense smothers BYU in 27-0 win
- USA orders closure of Russian consulate
- Froome retains Vuelta red jersey
- Myanmar's Suu Kyi faces pressure
- Trump, SKorea's Moon Agree to Boost Seoul's Missile Capabilities
- Thousands of People Evacuate Homes in Frankfurt, Germany Before WWII Bomb Defused
- LPGA Cambia Portland Classic golf tournament
- Gauri Lankesh murder sparks outrage, Karna govt forms SIT
- North Korea Appears to Conduct Nuclear Test, South Korea Says
- Ontario gas prices headed for major spike in wake of Harvey