In brief
The Italian Competition Authority (AGCM) has imposed a fine of EUR 25,895,043 on Morellato S.p.A. for having implemented a restrictive agreement in the (selective) distribution of mid-range and accessible jewelry and watches, carried out in the period between 20 July 2018 and 23 December 2025 (see the official press release available here in Italian only).
In more detail
Background
The proceedings were initiated on 18 March 2025 following an anonymous report submitted through the Authority’s whistleblowing platform, concerning an alleged infringement of Article 101 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). In particular, the AGCM was called upon to assess whether a clause contained in the selective distribution agreements – prohibiting distributors from selling products through third-party online marketplace platforms – was capable of hindering the effective use of the internet within the distribution network, despite the fact that Morellato itself was active on such platforms through its own official stores.
In July 2025, the scope of the proceedings was extended in order to also assess a practice of resale price maintenance (RPM).
AGCM findings
With reference to the RPM conduct, the Authority found that Morellato set the maximum levels of discounts that distributors could apply on online sales channels, through the issuance of internet policy recommendations addressed to authorized retailers. The investigation showed that the Company systematically monitored distributors’ activities, both on marketplaces and on their respective websites, by using external software to which it provided all relevant search parameters.
Morellato also adopted a wide range of retaliatory measures against retailers that did not comply with its instructions, including warnings and reminders, requests for the revocation of discounts or the suspension of the sale of certain products, automatic blocking of orders, blocking of third platform accounts and, ultimately, threats to terminate the contractual relationship.
The RPM practice, as a “hardcore” restriction of competition under the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER) and Article 101(1) TFEU, cannot benefit from the exemption provided for under the VBER.
As regards the clause prohibiting the use of marketplaces, the investigation highlighted the central role of this distribution channel for both Morellato and its distributors. Compliance with this prohibition was also monitored by the Company and enforced through threats and retaliatory measures in the event of breach, notwithstanding the fact that Morellato itself operated directly on marketplaces.
The AGCM recalled that, according to the EU Guidelines, marketplace restrictions applied in a discriminatory manner are unlikely to satisfy the conditions set out in Article 101(3) TFEU. The clause at issue was therefore qualified as a restriction under Article 101(1) TFEU, as it was capable of affecting intrabrand competition between Morellato and its distributors and, at the same time, was neither justified, nor necessary or proportionate with respect to the alleged objectives of protecting the products subject to selective distribution, also in light of its discriminatory application.
Points for reflection
The proceedings under review form part of a broader enforcement trend launched by the AGCM as of 2025, specifically focused on vertical restraints with regard to pricing policies. In this context, since 2025 the Authority has initiated a number of investigations that are still pending, including:
- Case against a company active in the production and commercialization of watches: the AGCM suspects that undertaking used field reports and online checks to identify discounting retailers, exerting pressure aimed at eliminating even minimal price variations. Pre-investigation activities revealed systematic monitoring of authorized retailers’ e‑commerce sites and a substantial alignment of prices with the manufacturer’s price lists.
- Case against a group active in the production and commercialization of watches: the Group may have implemented a structured monitoring system of its selective distribution network, combined with retaliatory measures (such as supply reductions) against distributors that failed to comply with “suggested” price levels. The checks carried out revealed significant homogeneity of online retail prices, with retailers applying identical prices despite being formally free to grant discounts.
- Case against a manufacturer of drones and its Italian distributor: the AGCM is examining vertical agreements between the principal and its Italian distributor, with particular focus on a potential coordinated strategy aimed at fixing resale prices and limiting competition among retailers in the high-end professional drone segment, with possible effects also on public tenders and corporate procurement.
Against the background of relatively limited enforcement activity in the field of vertical agreements over the past decade – with the exception of certain significant cases such as I854 (Food Supplements, 2021), I813 (Online Stoves, 2018), (Distribution Contracts) and I766 (Inverters, 2014), all of which were closed with the acceptance of commitments and without a finding of infringement – the current increase in whistleblowing reports and the use of sophisticated digital monitoring tools appear to indicate a significant strengthening of the AGCM’s enforcement action in this area.
Current enforcement trend make it advisable to carefully review policies and management practices regarding dealings with retailers, in order to avoid resale price maintenance or unjustified restrictions on access to online sales channels.