More Intel on the territorial limits of EU competition law

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-19
Author(s):  
Edward Coulson ◽  
Andrew Leitch

The recent increased focus of the European Commission on cartels formed and operated outside of the EU, which nonetheless harm competition in the internal market, has led to a corresponding increase in private damages actions being pursued in the English courts for losses occasioned by those cartels. Those private damages actions have tested both the jurisdictional reach of the English courts and the territorial scope of EU competition law. This article discusses the successful appeal by iiyama against the partial strike out of its private damages claims in the English High Court for losses occasioned by the CRT Glass and LCD cartels. The impact of the Court of Justice's decision in Intel, which was handed down between iiyama's damages actions being struck out and its successful appeal, is also discussed, together with the High Court's subsequent decision in Unlockd, which followed Intel and iiyama. Taken together, these cases provide significant increased clarity on the issues of jurisdiction and applicable law in private damages actions before the English courts.

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-383
Author(s):  
Václav Šmejkal

Abstract Distribution cartels in the automotive sector used to be frequently dismantled and sanctioned by the European Commission and the EU Courts still some 15 years ago. In recent years, however, only a few cases have been reported at the national level of EU Member States. Is it because the distribution of new cars really ceased to be a competition problem as the European Commission declared when it removed this part of the automotive business from the specific Block Exemption Regulation for the automotive sector in 2010? The purpose of the present analysis is first to inspect the car distribution cases that emerged in the EU after the year 2000 and, second, to speculate somewhat whether new forms of distribution, brought by the digitalization of marketing and sales, cannot bring about also new risks to cartel agreements and other types of distortions of competition in car sales.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 91-106
Author(s):  
Stavros Kozobolis

This study investigates deontic modality, the grammatical category through which legal texts express mainly obligation and permission, in an English-Greek bilingual corpus composed of legislative texts related to European Union (EU) Competition Law. More specifically, the study is based on Biel’s discussion on deontic modality, i.e. deontic obligation and deontic permission (Biel 2014: 158). The analysis of the data is mainly quantitative, while a small-scale qualitative analysis is also carried out when necessary. The results of the study are compared with the specific guidelines proposed by the EU Institutions for English and Greek, i.e. the Joint Practical Guide of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission for persons involved in the drafting of European Union legislation (2015), the English Style Guide: A handbook for authors and translators in the European Commission for English (2018) and the Greek Style Guide: A handbook for authors and translators in the European Commission for Greek (n.d.), as well as with those of earlier studies on legislative texts.


Author(s):  
Arletta Gorecka

The relationship between competition law and privacy is still seen as problematic with academics and professionals trying to adequately assess the impact of privacy on the competition law sphere. The chapter looks at the legal development of the EU merger proceedings to conclude that EU competition law is based on the prevailing approach and assesses decisions involving data through the spectrum of keeping a competitive equilibrium in hypothetical markets. Secondly, it considers the legal developments in the EU Member States' practice, which acknowledges the apparent intersection between the phenomena of competition law and privacy. This chapter attempts to propose that privacy concerns appear to hold a multidimensional approach on competition legal regime; nevertheless, it does not result in the need of legal changes within the remits of competition law, as the privacy concerns are already protected by the data protection and consumer protection law.


Author(s):  
Alison Jones

Alison Jones looks at vertical agreements in Chapter 3. This chapter charts the development of UK competition law and policy towards vertical agreements over the 20 years since the Competition Act 1998 came into force. It traces how UK policy has evolved, before examining the UK jurisprudence that assesses the compatibility of vertical agreements with competition law. It notes that although many UK cases initially focused on resale price maintenance, more recently a number have analysed vertical restraints affecting online selling, which have proliferated since 2000 with the rapid growth of e-commerce. The chapter also considers how the law could, or should, develop in the future, especially now the transition period following the UK’s departure from the EU has ended. An important issue considered is whether, post-Brexit, the UK authorities should continue to follow EU competition law in this sphere, which has in significant respects been influenced by internal market considerations, or whether it should take a different course.


Author(s):  
Irina Viktorovna Shugurova

The subject of this research is the analysis of interaction between the EU competition law and the intellectual property legislation in the conditions of the development of digital environment. The goal lies in determination of the peculiarities of observance of the EU competition law in the process of implementation and protection of the intellectual property rights. The author dwells on correlation between the principle of free movement of goods and services within the single market and the principle of territorial scope of exclusive rights. Analysis is conducted on the key provisions of the European Commission Regulation, which exclude certain agreements, namely on the transfer of technologies, from the Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The main conclusion lies in the theoretical assumption that the EU legal policy in the sphere of competition in the conditions of the development of the Digital Single Market is aimed simultaneously at protection of competition and protection of the potential of innovations. Reaching the balance between the interests of all parties to the market relations would promote innovations and keep the market open. The scientific novelty of this research consists in comprehensive examination of the main approaches of the European Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Union towards settling disputes in the area of licensing, as well possible abuse by the copyright holders of their dominant position in the conditions of development of the digital environment. The author’s main contribution lies in comprehensive examination of the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on Protection of Competition from the perspective of implementation and protection of exclusive rights.


Author(s):  
Rodger Barry ◽  
Ferro Miguel Sousa ◽  
Marcos Francisco

This chapter sets the context for the EU’s Antitrust Damages Directive of 2014 in order to understand its significance and potential impact. It first provides a historical background to EU competition law before discussing its public enforcement, focusing on the traditional role of the European Commission in enforcing the EU competition law rules. It then considers developments in EU law private enforcement, citing the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and European Commission in seeking to promote and facilitate private enforcement, particularly damages actions. It also examines the experience of damages actions in the EU, the issue of collective redress, the US antitrust private enforcement context and experience, and EU private international law rules and their significance for raising damages actions across the Member States’ courts. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the development of competition law damages actions under EU law.


2020 ◽  
pp. 641-684
Author(s):  
Marios Costa ◽  
Steve Peers

This chapter examines the core elements of competition law in the European Union (EU). It provides a number of examples of the types of agreements covered by EU competition law and shows the dangers which may arise when independent undertakings come together to coordinate their activities to distort competition. The chapter reviews the impact of anti-competitive agreements on the internal market and focuses on the abuse of market power and controls over concentrations. Overall, the chapter discusses the provisions and enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).


2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 79-98
Author(s):  
Anna Piszcz

On 11 June 2013, the European Commission adopted a package of measures to tackle the lack of an efficient and coherent private enforcement system of EU competition law in its Member States. In particular, a draft Damages Directive was proposed in order to meet the need for a sound European approach to private enforcement of EU competition law in damages actions. The Damages Directive was ultimately adopted on 26 November 2014. This paper explores some aspects of private antitrust enforcement which have not received sufficient attention from the EU decision-makers during the long preparatory and legislative works preceding the Directive. The paper discusses also some of the remedies that have not been harmonised, and shows how these ‘gaps’ in harmonisation may limit the Directive’s expected influence on both the thinking and practice of private antitrust enforcement in Europe. It is argued in conclusion that further harmonisation may be needed in order to actually transform private enforcement of EU competition law before national courts


Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood

Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) prohibit anti-competitive business practices. The European Commission, national competition authorities, and national courts enforce Articles 101 and 102 under powers conferred by Regulation 1/2003. From time to time, the European Commission issues non-binding notices providing clarification of the competition rules. This chapter focuses on Article 101, but begins with an outline of Articles 101 and 102 and the rules on enforcement. In broad terms, Article 101 prohibits business agreements or arrangements which prevent, restrict, or distort competition within the internal market and affect trade between Member States.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document