Ius Omnibus welcomes yesterday’s judgment (29.01.2026) of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Case C-286/24, Meliá Hotels International v Ius Omnibus, which provides crucial clarification on consumers’ access to evidence in antitrust damages actions and reinforces the effectiveness of private enforcement of EU competition law.
The case arises from a request for disclosure of information sought by Ius Omnibus in Portugal to assess and prepare a collective action for damages following a European Commission decision finding that Meliá participated in an anticompetitive vertical restriction. After losing before the 1st instance and 2nd instance courts, Meliá challenged the disclosure orders before the Supreme Court, arguing that the legal requirements for such access to evidence were not met.
In its judgment, the CJEU confirms several key principles that significantly strengthen the position of consumers and their representative organisations.
First, the Court clarifies that the Antitrust Damages Directive (Directive 2014/104/EU) applies to pre-action disclosure proceedings, where national law provides for them, even when the disclosure is sought before a damages action is formally brought. This confirms that access to evidence is an essential tool to make the right to compensation effective in practice.
Second, the Court explains how national courts should assess the plausibility of harm in cases based on prior infringement decisions of the European Commission. In particular, the CJEU confirms that Commission decisions finding an infringement by object are binding as to the existence of that infringement, even if the decision is not yet final or resulted from a settlement procedure.
While such a decision does not automatically prove that consumers suffered harm, it may contain strong indications that damage is plausible and must be assessed together with other evidence reasonably available to claimants. In this case, the Court expressly notes that the Commission decision included elements indicating that Portuguese consumers could have been harmed by the infringement.
The Court further recalls that, in cartel cases, EU law establishes a presumption that cartels cause harm to consumers, unless the defendants prove otherwise. More generally, the CJEU clarifies that the plausibility test required for access to evidence does not require claimants to show that harm is “more likely than not”, but only that it is reasonably acceptable that the infringement may have caused damage.
The case now returns to the Portuguese Supreme Court, which must decide whether to confirm the judgments of the lower courts ordering Meliá to disclose the information necessary to determine whether, and to what extent, Portuguese consumers were harmed by the infringement identified by the European Commission.
Ius Omnibus considers this judgment a major step forward for effective consumer protection and collective redress in Europe. By lowering unjustified barriers to access to evidence, the Court ensures that consumers are not deprived of their right to seek compensation simply because key information is held exclusively by infringing companies.