29. Competition Law: Mergers

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1122-1147
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Merger Control ◽  
Merger Policy ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Merger Regulation ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Academic Debate ◽  
The Way

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU law on mergers, first examining the policy reasons underlying merger control. It then considers the jurisdictional, procedural, and substantive aspects to EU merger policy. Jurisdictional issues cover the types of concentration that are subject to the Merger Regulation and the inter-relationship between merger control at EU and national levels. Procedural issues cover matters such as the way in which notice of a proposed merger must be given and the investigative powers possessed by the Commission. Substantive issues of merger policy include matters such as the test for determining whether a merger or concentration should be allowed and the extent to which efficiencies produced by the concentration should be taken into account. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU competition law and the UK post-Brexit.

29. Competition Law: Mergers

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1163-1189
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Merger Control ◽  
Merger Policy ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Merger Regulation ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Academic Debate ◽  
The Way

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU law on mergers, first examining the policy reasons underlying merger control. It then considers the jurisdictional, procedural, and substantive aspects to EU merger policy. Jurisdictional issues cover the types of concentration that are subject to the Merger Regulation and the inter-relationship between merger control at EU and national levels. Procedural issues cover matters such as the way in which notice of a proposed merger must be given and the investigative powers possessed by the Commission. Substantive issues of merger policy include matters such as the test for determining whether a merger or concentration should be allowed and the extent to which efficiencies produced by the concentration should be taken into account. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU competition law and the UK post-Brexit.

28. Competition Law:

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Merger Control ◽  
Merger Policy ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Merger Regulation ◽  
Academic Debate ◽  
The Way

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses EU law on mergers, first examining the policy reasons underlying merger control. It then considers the jurisdictional, procedural, and substantive aspects to EU merger policy. Jurisdictional issues cover the types of concentration that are subject to the Merger Regulation and the inter-relationship between merger control at EU and national levels. Procedural issues cover matters such as the way in which notice of a proposed merger must be given and the investigative powers possessed by the Commission. Substantive issues of merger policy include matters such as the test for determining whether a merger or concentration should be allowed and the extent to which efficiencies produced by the concentration should be taken into account.

Individual Sanctions of Competition Law: A Comparison between the UK and Turkey

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 154-171
Author(s):  
Samet Caliskan ◽  
Saliha Oner
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Deterrent Effect ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
High Expectations ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Way

It is a highly advocated view that a competition law with sanctions targeting individuals would achieve a greater deterrent impact than one that does not. Having introduced individual sanctions does not, however, guarantee that a market would have less anticompetitive conduct, because these sanctions are effective only insofar as they are severely implemented on wrongdoing individuals. UK competition law is one example of this issue because cases where individuals have been targeted and punished are significantly fewer than the authorities expected, in spite of it being more than 15 years since individual sanctions were introduced amidst high expectations. This article examines the individual sanctions of competition law in the UK and Turkey. It argues that Turkey is on the right path by departing from the way in which EU law enforces the rules of competition law, and is moving closer to UK law. However, it is argued that further steps should be cautiously considered to avoid the same issues which UK competition law is currently experiencing, as there are serious doubts that the latter has achieved the desired deterrent effect.

27. Competition Law: Article 101

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1072-1125
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Concerted Practice ◽  
Key Features ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. EU competition law covers anti-competitive agreements between firms, abuse of a dominant position, and mergers. Article 101 TFEU is the principal vehicle for the control of anti-competitive agreements. This chapter examines its key features. These include: the meaning given to the terms agreement and concerted practice; the relationship between Article 101(1) and (3); the extent to which economic analysis does and should take place within Article 101(1); and the interpretation accorded to Article 101(3), including whether non-economic factors can be taken into account. The discussion then shifts to more detailed examination of vertical agreements, followed by an outline of the reform of the enforcement regime for Articles 101 and 102. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU competition law and the UK post-Brexit.

27. Competition Law: Article 101

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1034-1086
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Concerted Practice ◽  
Key Features ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. EU competition law covers anti-competitive agreements between firms, abuse of a dominant position, and mergers. Article 101 TFEU is the principal vehicle for the control of anti-competitive agreements. This chapter examines its key features. These include: the meaning given to the terms agreement and concerted practice; the relationship between Article 101(1) and (3); the extent to which economic analysis does and should take place within Article 101(1); and the interpretation accorded to Article 101(3), including whether non-economic factors can be taken into account. The discussion then shifts to more detailed examination of vertical agreements, followed by an outline of the reform of the enforcement regime for Articles 101 and 102. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU competition law and the UK post-Brexit.

Investment Arbitration and EU (Competition) Law – Lessons Learned from the Micula Saga

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 330-354
Author(s):  
Alesia Tsiabus ◽  
Guillaume Croisant
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
State Aid ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Great Opportunity ◽  
Investment Arbitration ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

On 19 February 2020, in the latest episode to date of the long-running Micula saga, the United Kingdom (UK) Supreme Court gave its green light to the enforcement in the (UK) of the award obtained by the Micula brothers against Romania (Award) under the 2002 Sweden-Romania bilateral investment treaty (BIT), despite the fact that the question of whether this Award constitutes state aid prohibited under EU law was pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The Supreme Court ruled that the UK enforcement obligations under the ICSID Convention could not be affected by the EU duty of sincere cooperation, as the UK’s ratification of the ICSID Convention preceded its accession to the EU. The UK Supreme Court judgment, and the prior main episodes of the Micula saga in the framework of the ICSID, EU state aid and enforcement proceedings, offer a great opportunity to explore the increasingly tumultuous relationship between investment arbitration and EU (competition) law, in particular the compatibility of intra- EU investment arbitrations under the ICSID Convention with EU law and the coexistence of selective protections under international investment law with EU state aid law.

5. Procedure: investigation

2019 ◽  
pp. 94-134
Author(s):  
Sandra Marco Colino
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Criminal Jurisdiction ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Competition Laws ◽  
The Way

This chapter deals with the way in which infringements of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and Chapter I and II Prohibitions of the Competition Act 1998 are investigated and attacked. The European Commission has its own powers to investigate infringements of EU competition law by virtue of Regulation 1/2003. It may cooperate with national competition authorities (NCAs), who also have their own powers by virtue of EU law and their respective national competition laws. NCAs and the European Commission cooperate through the European Competition Network (ECN). The European Commission and the Competition Markets Authority (CMA) may obtain information, or may investigate on-site. The CMA also has criminal jurisdiction in some cases. Undertakings subject to investigation have rights that must be observed.

Part I Introduction, 1 Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wijckmans Frank ◽  
Tuytschaever Filip
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Public And Private Enforcement ◽  
The Eu

This chapter explains the term ‘vertical agreements’ and what it covers. It addresses a number of general issues that are relevant to the EU competition law treatment of vertical agreements in general. It describes the implementation and the (public and private) enforcement of Article 101 TFEU before and after the entry into force of Regulation 1/2003. The chapter provides the historical background of both Regulation 330/2010 and Regulation 461/2010. In particular, it devotes specific attention to the nature and legal and practical consequences of soft EU competition law (in the form of notices, guidelines, etc) as opposed to hard EU competition law (provisions of primary and secondary EU law).

Part I EU Competition Law Private Enforcement and the Antitrust Damages Directive, 2 Promotion and Harmonization of Antitrust Damages Claims by Directive 2014/104/EU?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodger Barry ◽  
Ferro Miguel Sousa ◽  
Marcos Francisco
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Eu Competition Law

This chapter explains the contents and goals of the Antitrust Damages Directive (Directive 2014/104/EU), the corollary of the EU’s policy towards the promotion and facilitation of private enforcement of competition law. It first traces the evolution in EU competition law enforcement and policy that led to the adoption of the Directive before considering the goals of the Directive in more detail, namely to provide rules for the effective compensation of victims of antitrust infringements and to harmonize some rules concerning damages claims. It then examines the Directive’s legal basis under EU Law as well as substantive provisions, including those relating to compensatory principles, quantification of harm, and consensual dispute resolution. The chapter goes on to highlight neglected issues, limitations, and inherent biases regarding the scope and nature of the Directive’s rules and concludes with an analysis of issues arising from implementation of the Directive in Member States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document