European Commission fines three fashion brands €157 million

The European Commission (EC) has imposed fines worth €157 million on three fashion brands: Chloé, Gucci and Loewe, who market high-end fashion products, including apparel, leather goods and various accessories. They have been fined for restricting the ability of both their online and brick-and-mortar retailers to fix their own resale prices, discounts and sales periods. This case also shows the importance of cooperating with the EC throughout the investigation, as all of these companies were able to reduce their fines, two of them even down to half the initial proposal.

Common denominator: fixing resale prices, monitoring and commercial pressure

The EC’s investigation officially started in 2023, with unannounced inspections at the three companies’ headquarters. The conclusion was that the three companies restricted the ability of their retailers to fix their own online and offline prices, limiting, de facto, their freedom to establish the retail prices for almost their entire range of products in the European Economic Area (EEA). According to the EC, this conduct increased prices and reduced choice for consumers, constituting an infringement of article 101 of the TFEU and of the guidelines on vertical restraints.

In particular, and in line with the information that has been made public, the three fashion companies required their retailers to not deviate from recommended retail prices, and to limit discounts and sales periods. In this way, they had their retailers apply the same prices and sales conditions they applied in their own direct sales channels.

One of them even imposed restrictions on online sales for a specific product line, banning their retailers from marketing these items through their digital channels.

Application and monitoring systems

To ensure compliance with their pricing policies—according to published information—the three fashion companies established a system to continuously monitor the retailers’ prices, enabling them to follow up with those that deviated from the established guidelines. Generally speaking, the retailers adhered to the companies’ pricing policies, either from the start or after receiving a warning.

The companies being investigated acted independently of each another; however the timing of the three cases overlapped. The EC has also considered that several of the affected retailers commercialize products designed by the three designers. 

Background: a consistent decision-making practice

It is not the first time the EC has focused on the fashion industry. In 2018, it imposed a fine of €39.8 million on another company from this sector (Guess) for a single and continuous infringement of restricting its retailers from setting their resale prices independently and reducing intra-brand competition by authorized retailers in its selective distribution network (see the summary of the EC’s decision here).

Likewise, two months after the inspections at the now sanctioned companies’ premises, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirmed, in its judgment of the Super Bock case, that the circulation of monthly lists indicating the minimum resale prices and distribution margins—as well as the fact that compliance with those prices is monitored under threat of reprisals—are elements that can lead to a conclusion that the supplier seeks to impose minimum resale prices on its retailers and could therefore constitute a restriction of competition (see paragraph 52 of the CJEU judgment of June 29, 2023, on the matter C-211/22, Super Bock Bebidas, available here).

In parallel with this investigation, the EC also investigated an alleged agreement in the fashion industry, after suspecting that various companies may have violated article 101 of the TFEU and article 53 of the EEA Agreement, through an alleged agreement to coordinate seasonal calendars and sustainability initiatives. However, the EC discontinued the matter in April 2024.

Cooperation and penalty amount

Gucci and Loewe had their fines reduced by half, and Chloé, who cooperated but only after the other two companies had done so, obtained a 15% reduction. Since the EC announced the penalties, the companies have taken the opportunity to publicly reject these kinds of practices.

Conclusion

This case, together with other recent cases investigated by the national competition authorities—e.g., the proceedings against Lutec (a lamp retailer) by the Hungarian competition authority in 2025; against Empire Brands (a cat and dog food retailer) by the Polish competition authority in 2025; or against Rolex by the French competition authority in 2023—highlights the competition authorities’ ongoing interest in pursuing vertical restrictions and their different components, from resale price maintenance to the reprisals for non-compliance and restrictions on online sales. All of this confirms that no sector is immune to the risks arising from the application of this type of restriction.

To summarize, this new case proves that selective distribution, characteristic of this sector, does not allow for exceptions in terms of retailers' freedom to set their own commercial policies.

For more information, please contact our Cuatrecasas's specialists or Knowledge and Innovation Area.