The State of State Action in EU Competition Law (Post-Greek Lignite) and a National Competition Strategy for China

2016 ◽  
pp. 41-96
Author(s):  
Mel Marquis
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Competition Strategy ◽  
State Action ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition

5 Enforcement, Institutions, and Procedure

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geradin Damien ◽  
Layne-Farrar Anne ◽  
Petit Nicolas
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Competition Rules

This chapter discusses the enforcement of EU competition law. EU competition law is primarily enforced through a system of ‘public enforcement’, where specialized administrative institutions initiate, decide, and terminate cases. Articles 101 and 102 TFEU are enforced by competition authorities at both the European—by the Commission—and national levels—by national competition authorities (NCAs). Since the adoption of Regulation 1/2003, the Commission and the NCAs form a ‘network’ of competition authorities called the European Competition Network (ECN). A set of specific legal mechanisms have been adopted to ensure a harmonious and effective enforcement of EU competition rules amongst the ECN. In addition, national courts also offer a remedial avenue for plaintiffs seeking to invoke EU competition rules. The chapter then looks at how the Commission and NCAs process competition cases. In general, a competition case goes through four stages: detection, investigation, evaluation, and decision.

15. Enforcement of EU competition law

2019 ◽  
pp. 686-698
Author(s):  
Elspeth Berry ◽  
Matthew J. Homewood ◽  
Barbara Bogusz
Keyword(s):  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Competition Laws ◽  
Complete Series ◽  
Explanatory Text ◽  
The Relationship

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter discusses the enforcement of EU competition law. It covers the enforcement regime; burden of proof; the relationship between Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, and national competition laws; cooperation with national authorities; cooperation with national courts; the powers of the competition authorities of the Member States; the European Commission’s powers; safeguards for undertakings; the 2006 Leniency Notice; and private enforcement.

scholarly journals Priority Setting as A Double-Edged Sword: How Modernization Strengthened the Role of Public Policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 435-487
Author(s):  
Or Brook
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Common View ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Policy Objectives ◽  
Detrimental Impact

Abstract This article questions the common view that the modernization of EU competition law has removed public policy considerations from the public enforcement of Article 101 TFEU. Based on a large quantitative and qualitative database including all of the Commission’s and five national competition authorities’ enforcement actions (N ≈ 1,700), it maintains that modernization has merely shifted the consideration of public policy from the substantive scope of Article 101(3) TFEU to procedural priority setting decisions. Instead of engaging in a complex balancing of competition and public policy considerations, the competition authorities have simply refrained from pursuing cases against anticompetitive agreements that raise public policy questions or settled those cases by accepting negotiated remedies. This outcome, the article claims, is a double-edged sword. The Commission’s attempt to narrow down the scope of Article 101(3) as part of modernization has not eliminated the role of public policy in the enforcement. Rather, undertakings can reasonably assume that restrictions of competition that produce some public policy objectives will not be enforced, even if they do not meet the conditions for an exception. These discretionary nonenforcement decisions have a detrimental impact on the effectiveness, uniformity, and legal certainty of EU competition law enforcement. JEL: K21, K230

scholarly journals The Implementation of the ECN+ Directive in Hungary and Lessons Beyond

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (19) ◽  
pp. 55-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katalin J. Cseres
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Competition Rules ◽  
Institutional Aspects ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
The Eu

In order to facilitate national competition authorities (NCAs) in their application of EU competition rules, the EU legislator adopted Directive 2019/1/EU. The Directive’s aim is to empower the competition authorities of the Member States to be more effective enforcers of competition law and to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market. The so-called ECN+ Directive introduces minimum harmonisation rules allowing competition authorities to have common investigative, decision-making (notably fining decisions) and enforcement powers. The Directive, furthermore, sets minimum safeguards for the NCAs’ independence, accountability and resources as well as harmonizes leniency programmes including the coordination of national leniency programmes with each other and with that of the European Commission. This paper critically analyzes the legal and policy developments that paved the way for the adoption of this Directive. Moreover, it examines the changes the implementation of the Directive is likely to generate in current Hungarian law and policy of competition protection. The focus of the paper’s assessment is on the institutional aspects of the Directive and the enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, in particular the mechanisms for ensuring independence and accountability of the NCAs. Through the assessment of the Hungarian implementation, the paper aims to shed light on a broader context of the Directive and the enforcement of EU competition law in EU Member States. The paper shows that the implementation of the Directive may fail to translate into (more) effective enforcement without an effective institutional capacity on the side of the NCAs, and in the broader legal and constitutional context of competition law and its multilevel enforcement

8. EU competition law: Article 102 TFEU

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Abusive Behaviour ◽  
Article 102 Tfeu

This chapter focuses on Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Article 102 prohibits, as incompatible with the internal market, any abuse by undertakings in a dominant position within the internal market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States. It should be noted at the outset that ‘dominance’ itself is not prohibited, but only when such dominance is accompanied with abusive behaviour that may affect trade. Like Article 101, Article 102 is enforced by the European Commission, national competition authorities, and national courts under powers conferred by Regulation 1/2003.

Vertical Agreements in EU Competition Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tuytschaever Filip ◽  
Wijckmans Frank
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Industry Regulation ◽  
Private Practitioners ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Legal Concepts ◽  
Reference Tool ◽  
Block Exemption ◽  
The Eu

The book discusses the EU competition law regime and practice in respect of vertical agreements. The concept of vertical agreements is not limited to distribution arrangements, but covers also supply and subcontracting scenarios. Particular attention is paid to e-commerce and the sector-specific rules applicable to the automotive industry (Regulation 461/2010). The book covers systematically the various aspects of Regulation 330/2010, which is the European block exemption regulation generally applicable to vertical agreements, as well as the Vertical Guidelines related thereto. In addition to a systematic presentation of the relevant legal concepts, the book provides practical guidance and concrete cases. Such cases include European precedents and decisions adopted in national competition law proceedings. The authors have inserted concrete examples stemming from their private practice in the field. The book offers concrete guidance for vertical agreements falling outside of the scope of Regulation 330/2010 where the parties may need to conduct a so-called self-assessment. It describes the economic theories underpinning such assessment and presents the relevant economic concepts in a digestible manner. The book is intended as an easy reference tool for private practitioners and legal scholars. The second edition of the book has been labelled by many practitioners as their ‘bible’ on vertical agreements.

What is ‘Competition Law’?—Measuring EU Member States’ Leeway to Regulate Platform-to-Business Agreements

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens-Uwe Franck ◽  
Nils Stock
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Commercial Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Regulatory Interventions ◽  
The Common ◽  
The One ◽  
Hotel Booking

Abstract If both national competition law and Article 101 TFEU apply to an agreement, the former must not set rules that are stricter than the latter. Member States remain free, though, to impose stricter rules if they are not classified as ‘competition law’. We analyse relevant jurisprudence by the English and French courts that have dealt with potential conflicts between, on the one hand, EU competition law and, on the other hand, the common law restraint of trade doctrine and the pratiques restrictives de concurrence under French commercial law. We develop criteria that allow (national) ‘competition law’ to be distinguished from similar regulatory interventions into agreements that pursue purposes distinct from Article 101 TFEU and which, therefore, must not be regarded as ‘competition law’. This article illustrates and elaborates on the challenges for the implementation of our approach by focusing on the ban on the use of parity clauses by hotel booking platforms in France, Austria, Italy, and Belgium. We map a possible way forward to prevent further regulatory fragmentation in the internal market with regard to the regulation of platform-to-business agreements.

scholarly journals Ukrainian Legislation on Competition in the Scope of Convergence with EU Competition Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 38-52
Author(s):  
Anna GLADSHTEIN
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
State Subsidies ◽  
The Eu

The paper is devoted to the study of national competition legislation of Ukraine in the scope of its convergence with EU Competition Law. The aims of the paper are (1) determination of named convergence between national legislation and EU Competition Law, (2) study of drivers of further adaptation of national competition legislation to the EU Law and (3) study of main legal constructions under the EU Competition Law as base line of transformation of Ukrainian competition legislation. In particular, the author studies means of adaptation of relevant legislation to EU Competition Law, common origins of national competition legislation and main legal constructions, used in national competition legislation (anticompetitive behavior, state subsidies etc.). It is stated, that due to adaptation process it had been done a series of steps, in particular, enactment of legislation towards unification matters of national competition legislation of Ukraine and EU Competition Law. The author noted that the one of the adaptation forms in relevant range is direct implementation of specified legal rules of EU Competition Law under the current legislation of Ukraine. In these circumstances rules aimed at implementation are specified under the Association Agreement between Ukraine and UE. The offered approach, even in the light of its efficiency, takes some legal risks. In particular, named risks arise from cases of laps of acts, which are aimed at implementation under the named Agreement. The author studies the most problematic spheres of national legislation adaptation to the EU Competition Law, in particular state subsidies and application practices of competition rules by relevant authorities (Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine). The author noted not only the importance of EU Competition Law implementation, but also adjustment of national law of Ukraine with application practices of relevant rules under the EU Competition Law. Special attention of the author is devoted to existence of sufficient quantities of evaluation notions, which accept wide limits discretion for any state institution, which could appreciate relevant provisions. The author concluded, that existence of evaluation notions themselves do not necessarily mean some imperfections or lack of development degree of relevant legislation because of back up possibility provided by unsuitable definitions or heavily regulation. It is stated that sufficient quantities of evaluation notions shall not result in legal regulation as potential negative consequences shall be resolved under the correction of law application practices.

EU Competition Law and Economics

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geradin Damien ◽  
Layne-Farrar Anne ◽  
Petit Nicolas
Keyword(s):  
Law And Economics ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Integrated Treatment ◽  
European Court ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Economic Reasoning ◽  
Economic Foundations

This EU competition law treatise fully integrates economic reasoning in its treatment of the decisional practice of the European Commission and the case-law of the European Court of Justice. Since the European Commission's move to a “more economic approach” to competition law reasoning and decisional practice, the use of economic argument in competition law cases has become a stricter requirement. Many national competition authorities are also increasingly moving away from a legalistic analysis of a firm's conduct to an effect-based analysis of such conduct, indeed most competition cases today involve teams composed of lawyers and industrial organisation economists. Ensuring an integrated approach to legal and economic analysis, the book contains economic reasoning throughout in accessible form, and, more pertinently for practitioners, examines economics in the light of how it is used and put to effect in the courts and decision-making institutions of the EU. A general introductory section sets EU competition law in its historical context. The second chapter goes on to explore the economic foundations of EU competition law. What follows is an integrated treatment of each of the core substantive areas of EU competition law, including Article 101 TFEU, Article 102 TFEU, mergers, cartels and other horizontal agreements, vertical restraints, and technology transfer agreements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document