scholarly journals Dawn Raids and the Role of Forensic IT in Antitrust Investigations

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (21) ◽  
pp. 187-218
Author(s):  
Jan Polański
Keyword(s):  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Current Approach ◽  
Digital Evidence ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Full Extent ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
National Jurisdiction ◽  
The Eu

While digital markets attract much attention of the antitrust community, important developments also take place in relation to the way antitrust investigations are handled and evidence is preserved. More and more enforcement actions of antitrust authorities rely on the ability to find and preserve digital evidence of an illegal activity. This article focuses on recent case law developments in relation to the approach to forensic IT in antitrust enforcement and investigates whether enough leeway is left to the antitrust authorities to properly discharge their powers. The article focuses on the procedural developments at the EU level and in one EU national jurisdiction, i.e. Poland. The article concludes that the current approach to forensics in antitrust does not allow to use available capabilities to a full extent. A proposal is made for an alternative approach, which would benefit effective antitrust enforcement and due process.

The ‘puzzle’ of workers’ mobility in Italy

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-108
Author(s):  
Massimiliano Delfino
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Political Agenda ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Transnational Mobility ◽  
Italian Case ◽  
Eu Directives ◽  
Italian Legislation ◽  
The Eu

In Italy, workers’ mobility is a very complicated puzzle that is composed of different pieces. This paper deals with such different pieces under the perspective of workers' mobility within the European Union and highlights that the term mobility is not a synonym of posting (of workers), since the latter term indicates only one of the types (although the most relevant) of workers’ mobility. The author starts with workers’ mobility within the national border and beyond the European Union. Then, he concentrates his attention on the Italian way of transposing the EU Directives on the transnational posting of workers, which is very problematic, especially with reference to the role of collective bargaining agreements. Special attention is dedicated to the issue of public policy where an important role is played by Italian case law, which is very interesting and not uniform. The paper ends with some predictions about the forthcoming Italian legislation concerning both national and transnational mobility, which will be possibly influenced by the domestic political agenda.

The EU ETS and the role of the courts: Emerging contours in the case of Arcelor

Climate Law ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjan Peeters
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Eu Ets ◽  
Specific Design ◽  
Valuable Contribution ◽  
Actual Case ◽  
Proper Design ◽  
Interesting Discussion ◽  
The Eu

This article presents an in-depth examination of how one of the EU’s courts has assessed a foundational claim against the EU ETS. It concerns the Arcelor case, in which a large steel company filed an application before the General Court of the EU requesting the partial annulment of the European legislation establishing the EU ETS and claiming damages. The industry lost the case, but the considerations of the court offer a valuable contribution to the much-needed broader discussion about the proper design of legislative frameworks for trading greenhouse gas emissions rights. In particular, the court provided an interesting discussion on the principle of equal treatment, the cancellation of allowances in the case of the closure of an installation, and the need for price regulation. However, some shortcomings in the court’s decision are evident. The article concludes by observing that, besides the interest in examining what the actual case law means for the specific design and application of emissions-trading schemes like the EU ETS, it is equally important to examine the ways in which courts succeed in assessing claims about this complicated regulatory instrument.

Public Enforcement of EU Antitrust Law: A Circle of Trust?

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-154
Author(s):  
Naida Dzino ◽  
Catalin S. Rusu
Keyword(s):  
Institutional Design ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Eu

The concept of trust is key to effectively enforcing the EU antitrust prohibitions in the ECN multi-level administration context. The manifestation of this concept is identified at different stages of the public enforcement system, where the Commission and the NCAs share the enforcement workload and assist each other's actions. Various EU legislative, soft-law and case-law landmarks have progressively contributed to developing this idea of trust, culminating with the adoption of Directive 2019/1, which aims to render NCAs as more effective enforcers of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. In this paper, we intend to determine whether the Directive furthers the trust already established in the last fifteen years of enforcement experience. We first track the development of the trust in the NCAs' EU antitrust enforcement work and assesses the building-blocks on which trust is shaped. Next, we evaluate the Directive's core elements (dealing with institutional design, enforcement and sanctioning powers, leniency, mutual assistance, etc.), in order to gauge their trust-enhancing potential, and to test whether the Directive correctly follows through the EU hard-, soft-, and case-law. We also look into any remaining enforcement gaps, which may undermine the trust between the European antitrust enforcers, and consequently the Directive's core objectives.

The Court of Justice of the EU and the Common European Asylum System: Entering the Third Phase of Harmonisation?

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 53-71
Author(s):  
Samuel Boutruche Zarevac
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Third Phase ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
Special Expertise ◽  
The Common ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
The Eu

Abstract ‘That assessment of the extent of the risk [of persecution] must, in all cases, be carried out with vigilance and care, since what are at issue are issues relating to the integrity of the person and to individual liberties, issues which relate to the fundamental values of the Union.’ The case law of the Court of Justice of the EU concerning the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is still limited. Nonetheless, even this limited case law already offers interesting insights into analysing the potential role of the Court of Justice of the EU in the development of the CEAS, and this jurisprudence is in any event likely to grow significantly, due to the fact that the provisions of the CEAS are the result of a political compromise and so lack clarity. This chapter examines the ruling delivered by the Court in the case of Elgafaji, which contains certain elements which address the interpretative difficulties raised by Article 15(c) of the Qualification Directive, and goes on to consider, through a discussion of the recent ruling in Abdulla, the extent to which the Court’s interpretation of those provisions of the CEAS which replicate the wording of the 1951 Convention will influence the interpretation of this international instrument, and the difficulties presented in this context. The extent of this influence remains to be seen, but it is clear in any event that the Court of Justice is likely to play a major role in the development of the CEAS. One amendment which may prove necessary is the modification of the Court of Justice’s procedural rules such that it can take into account the views of third-party organisations with a special expertise in this field.

scholarly journals Private antitrust enforcement in digital market

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-160
Author(s):  
Dominik Wolski
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Growth ◽  
Digital Transformation ◽  
Economic Life ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Eu

The increasing popularity of private antitrust enforcement in the EU is reflected by number of antitrust damages claims in the member states, following the transposition of the Damages Directive. Meanwhile, rapid growth of digitization in every aspect of social and economic life, particularly in business like commerce and services, has taken place. Recently, the above phenomenon was intensified by COVID-19. This paper aims at discussing private antitrust enforcement and antitrust damages claims in the context of digital transformation of the market. To this extent, there are several main characteristics of the market (e.g. multi-sided platforms, the role of third-party sellers, etc.), that have to be taken into consideration in the above discussion.

The Polluter Pays Principle in EU Climate Law: an Effective Tool before the Courts?

Climate Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Suzanne Kingston
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Potential Role ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Polluter Pays Principle ◽  
Energy Law ◽  
The Eu

In EU law the polluter pays principle (ppp) enjoys constitutional status: Article 191(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (tfeu) enshrines it among the fundamental principles of the EU’s environmental policy. This article considers the legal status and development of the ppp in EU law, in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (cjeu) and in EU policy, most recently in the EU’s Green New Deal. It goes on to identify three bodies of climate-related litigation where the ppp has been most influential to date: first, cases concerning the EU ets and emissions; second, cases concerning EU energy law; and third, cases concerning EU state-aid law. The conclusion reflects on the potential role of the ppp in other areas, including climate cases based on human and environmental rights, and climate cases brought against private parties.

The Court of Justice of the EU and the Common European Asylum System: Entering the Third Phase of Harmonisation?

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 53-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Boutruche Zarevac
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Third Phase ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
Special Expertise ◽  
The Common ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
The Eu

Abstract‘That assessment of the extent of the risk [of persecution] must, in all cases, be carried out with vigilance and care, since what are at issue are issues relating to the integrity of the person and to individual liberties, issues which relate to the fundamental values of the Union.’The case law of the Court of Justice of the EU concerning the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is still limited. Nonetheless, even this limited case law already offers interesting insights into analysing the potential role of the Court of Justice of the EU in the development of the CEAS, and this jurisprudence is in any event likely to grow significantly, due to the fact that the provisions of the CEAS are the result of a political compromise and so lack clarity. This chapter examines the ruling delivered by the Court in the case of Elgafaji, which contains certain elements which address the interpretative difficulties raised by Article 15(c) of the Qualification Directive, and goes on to consider, through a discussion of the recent ruling in Abdulla, the extent to which the Court’s interpretation of those provisions of the CEAS which replicate the wording of the 1951 Convention will influence the interpretation of this international instrument, and the difficulties presented in this context. The extent of this influence remains to be seen, but it is clear in any event that the Court of Justice is likely to play a major role in the development of the CEAS. One amendment which may prove necessary is the modification of the Court of Justice’s procedural rules such that it can take into account the views of third-party organisations with a special expertise in this field.

1. Introduction to the study of contract law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Macdonald ◽  
Ruth Atkins ◽  
Jens Krebs
Keyword(s):  
Bargaining Power ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
The Everyday ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

This chapter introduces some of the key ideas that will be encountered in the rest of the book, such as what is required for a contract. It touches upon the everyday role of contract, and that, although the book is heavily concerned with case law, contract disputes are often resolved without resort to the courts. It also introduces the idea of the evolution of contract law with the changing nature of society: the limitations placed on the use of an idea, such as ‘freedom of contract’, through recognition of the impact of inequality of bargaining power. Additionally, it alerts the reader to the impact of the EU.

scholarly journals Principled Silence or Mere Silence on Principles? The Role of the EU Charter’s Principles in the Case Law of the Court of Justice

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasper Krommendijk
Keyword(s):  
Direct Effect ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

Historical background of the inclusion of social rights in the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Distinction between rights and principles – Similarities between the conditions for direct effect and the criteria for distinguishing between Charter rights and principles – Implications of this distinction for the possibilities of judicial review – Reluctance of the ECJ to explicitly deal with the distinction until Glatzel, as illustrated by its earlier judgments in Dominguez and AMS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document