Because the EU commission didn't prove its case. There is a presumption of innocence in this field, and the commission has to produce evidence that an as-effici

Because the EU commission didn't prove its case. There is a presumption of innocence in this field, and the commission has to produce evidence that an as-efficient-competitor would not be able to charge sustainable prices in the face of the rebate scheme. The court held that the commission made errors in its analysis and so did not meet the burden of proof. From the court's summary: >The commission did not consider properly the criterion relating to the share of the market covered by the contested practice and also did not analyse correctly the duration of the rebates. >It follows, therefore, from all of the foregoing considerations that the analysis carried out by the commission is incomplete and, in any event, does not make it possible to establish to the requisite legal standard that the rebates at issue were capable of having, or were likely to have, anticompetitive effects, which is why the General Court annuls the decision. https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2022-01/cp220016en.pdf https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/202...