In today’s business world, competition among companies is shaped not only by the quality of their products and services, but also by their communication strategies with the public. However, the legal boundaries of such statements should be carefully determined. Statements made about competitors, particularly in Europe, may constitute “defamation” which are evaluated within the scope of competition law and provisions concerning unfair competition and may lead to serious legal consequences. In this context, a recent case in France has clearly demonstrated why companies should take a high degree of sensibility in their communication policies.
The Biomerieux Case: A precedent decision from France
QIAGEN N.V., one of the leading companies in the biotechnology sector, issued a press release on 03 March 2025 announcing that it filed a patent infringement action against Biomerieux S.A. before the Unified Patent Court (UPC). Subsequently, Biomerieux claimed that the press release was “defamatory” and constituted unfair competition, given that the company had only been notified of the lawsuit on 11 March 2025 and that there was no judicial decision yet.
The Lyon Court for Economic Activities ruled that QIAGEN’s press release constituted “defamation and unfair competition” against Biomerieux and issued a preliminary injunction. The Court stated that such unilateral information declared to those with expert knowledge in the field and also the general public, without providing any information on the context and nature of the facts giving rise to the alleged infringement prior to a court decision, leads to the portraying of Biomerieux as a company which had committed acts of patent infringement. The Court also emphasised that, due to the permanence of such an announcement on the internet, the impact of the violation would continue and that the removal of the press release from QIAGEN’s website would not end the violation.
In the reasoning of the preliminary injunction, it was stated that the factor of urgency required for granting of the preliminary injunction was also present in the concrete case since Biomerieux was a publically-traded company and the announcement coincided with the announcement of the financial statements of the company.
In scope of the decision of preliminary injunction issued by the Court:
This decision is of significance in terms of determining the legal boundaries of external communications, especially in patent infringement cases where the judicial process has started but is yet to be finalised.
The Legal Framework in Türkiye: Assessment in scope of the Turkish Commercial Code and Protection of Competition Code
Article 54 et seq. provisions related to unfair competition of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 (“TCC”) aims to ensure that commercial life operates within the framework of the rule of honesty and that market actors can compete on equal terms. In particular, Article 55(1)(a)(1) of the TCC clearly states that “disparaging others or their goods, work products, prices, activities or commercial affairs with false, misleading or unnecessarily offensive statements” constitutes unfair competition.
In addition, the Protection of Competition Code No. 4054 (“PCC”) prohibits acts that distort or restrict competition and aims to protect effective competition in the market. Although the PCC does not directly regulate the act of “defaming the competitor”, communication strategies that may have destructive effects in the market may be considered within this scope. In particular, it is possible to file a complaint before the Competition Authority if the public statements of enterprises holding dominant positions in the market have an obstructing impact on the activities of their competitors.
Although the number of public statements made by competitors- especially regarding ongoing judicial proceedings- which may constitute unfair competition and defamation, are high in number, the number of precedents on this particular matter in Turkish Law is extremely low, and challenges may be experienced in the effective application of the provisions of the TCC and the PCC.
As demonstrated by the Biomerieux decision, public statements regarding ongoing judicial proceedings should be prepared with extreme caution. Thus, it is of critical importance for companies to act in consideration of possible risks in terms of both the Turkish Commercial Code and the Protection of Competition Code when publishing public statements, especially in sensitive sectors where there is a high degree of competition, in order to protect the reputation and legal safety of companies.
[1] For the Biomerieux Decision published on the internet, please see: bioMerieux-ordonnance-11-04-2025-EN.pdf
Authors:
Özge Atılgan Karakulak, Partner
Email: ozge.atilgan@gun.av.tr
Zeynep Çağla Üstün, Managing Associate
Email: zeynep.ozcebe@gun.av.tr