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.

13. Public Enforcement by the Commission and the National Competition Authorities of the Antitrust Provisions

2019 ◽  
pp. 872-1018
Author(s):  
Alison Jones ◽  
Brenda Sufrin ◽  
Niamh Dunne
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
The Public ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Salient Features ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the public enforcement regime for the application of Articles 101 and 102 under Regulation 1/2003. It explains the system that applied previously under Regulation 17, and the reasons for, and salient features of, the ‘modernisation’ introduced by Regulation 1/2003. The chapter then examines: the complaints procedure; the powers of the Commission, including the investigation and inter partes stages of its procedure; the decisions which the Commission may take, including decisions imposing fines and commitments decisions; judicial review by the EU Courts; the European Competition Network (ECN) and enforcement by national competition authorities, including the changes to be introduced by the ECN+ Directive; and the possibility of sanctions against individuals.. The chapter also considers the application of fundamental rights provisions in EU competition proceedings.

2. The Competition Law and Institutions of the European Union

2019 ◽  
pp. 75-96
Author(s):  
Alison Jones ◽  
Brenda Sufrin ◽  
Niamh Dunne
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Directorate General ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Competition Rules ◽  
The Eu

This chapter sketches the history and functions of the EU and its institutions in order to set the EU competition rules in context. It then describes the competition provisions themselves and outlines the way in which the rules are applied and enforced, including the public enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 under Regulation 1/2003, the control of mergers with a European dimension under Regulation 139/2004, public enforcement by the national competition authorities of the Member States, and the role of private enforcement. It discusses the position and powers of the European Commission, particularly the role of the Competition Directorate General (DG Comp); the powers of the EU Courts; the significance of fundamental rights and the general principles of EU law in competition cases; the application of competition rules to particular sectors of the economy; and the application of the EU rules to the EEA.

The Lavish Corporate Hospitality: The Lawful and Unlawful Interaction of Public Officials and Private Sector Actors — Law and the Court Praxis in Finland

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-84
Author(s):  
Johanna Peurala
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Private Sector ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Business Sector ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
The Public ◽  
Clear Cut

Public officials can be offered hospitality, excursions, seminars or different kinds of benefits by the business sector. These kinds of benefits can be seen to be a customary practice or the management of public relations. Finnish law does not give any clear-cut answers when a certain benefit can be seen as lawful (as a gift) or unlawful (as a bribe). The aim of this research is to clarify, based on the Finnish Criminal Code, by Finnish case law, as well as soft law instruments, the thin line between unlawful and lawful benefits in this business–public sector interaction. The article also discusses the concept of the management of public relations which the Finnish courts have mentioned as the factor that can justify the benefits given to the public officials by business sector.

The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice in the Light of the EU Accession to the ECHR—Is the Break-up Inevitable?

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 227-254
Author(s):  
Alexander Kornezov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

AbstractEven though the decision to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) is a fait accompli, the terms under which the accession should take place are still very much open to debate. The present chapter focuses specifically on the possible tensions which may arise in the aftermath of the EU’s accession to the ECHR in four of the core elements of the EU area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ): recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, wrongful removal or retention of a child, the Common European Asylum System and the European Arrest Warrant. It then puts forward a number of solutions which could be included either in the accession agreement itself or in the post-accession case law of the ECtHR and which allow not only for the preservation of the coherence and integrity of the AFSJ but also for external judicial control on human rights matters in the AFSJ.

scholarly journals The ‘Europe with the Regions’ before the Court of Justice

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Panara
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
Regional Languages ◽  
The Eu

This article analyses the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning the regions. It argues that there is a discrepancy between the progressive framing of a ‘Europe with the regions’ in the political sphere and the limited impact of the Court in this field. This discrepancy does not emerge everywhere, nor does it emerge with the same intensity in all sectors. Indeed, in a number of areas, the CJEU has acknowledged the role and responsibilities of the regions. Examples include the right/duty of the regions to implement EU obligations, the protection of regional languages, as well as the ‘sufficient autonomy’ test developed by the CJEU in relation to state aid. There is no ‘ideological opposition’ of the CJEU to an increasing ‘regionalisation’ of the EU. There are, however, structural hindrances that prevent the Court from promoting further advancements of the status of the regions in the European edifice, particularly as regards their participation in EU processes. Since the EU remains a ‘union of states’, the ‘Europe with the regions’ has developed so far, and is likely to continue to develop, via advancements reflected in policy-making practices, soft-law arrangements and Treaty amendments rather than via the ‘judge-made federalism’ of the Court.

The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice in the Light of the EU Accession to the ECHR—Is the Break-up Inevitable?

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 227-254
Author(s):  
Alexander Kornezov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
European Arrest Warrant ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Even though the decision to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) is a fait accompli, the terms under which the accession should take place are still very much open to debate. The present chapter focuses specifically on the possible tensions which may arise in the aftermath of the EU’s accession to the ECHR in four of the core elements of the EU area of freedom, security and justice (AFSJ): recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, wrongful removal or retention of a child, the Common European Asylum System and the European Arrest Warrant. It then puts forward a number of solutions which could be included either in the accession agreement itself or in the post-accession case law of the ECtHR and which allow not only for the preservation of the coherence and integrity of the AFSJ but also for external judicial control on human rights matters in the AFSJ.

scholarly journals The Concept of Essence of Fundamental Rights in the EU Legal Order: Peeling the Onion to its Core

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 332-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maja Brkan
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Eu

Essence of fundamental rights – Article 52(1) of the Charter – Multi-level protection of fundamental rights in Europe – Sources of essence – European Court of Justice case law on ‘very substance’ of fundamental rights – Constitutional traditions common to the Member States – European Court of Human Rights – Court of Justice of the EU – Schrems – Principle of proportionality – Absolute theory – Relative theory – Classification of interferences with essence – Objective interference – Subjective interference – Absolute rights – EU methodology for determination of interference with essence

scholarly journals Collecting Evidence Through Access to Competition Authorities’ Files – Interplay or Potential Conflicts Between Private and Public Enforcement Proceedings?

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. 161-180
Author(s):  
Anna Gulińska
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Public Enforcement ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Private Action ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Access To Documents

Information asymmetry between claimants seeking damages for competition law violations and the alleged infringing undertaking(s) is a key problem in the development of private antitrust enforcement because it often prevents successful actions for damages. The Damages Directive is a step forward in the facilitation of access to evidence relevant for private action claims. Its focus lies on, inter alia, 3rd party access to files in proceedings conducted by national competition authorities (NCAs). The harmonization was triggered by the inconsistencies in European case-law and yet the uniform rules on access to documents held in NCAs’ files proposed in the Damages Directive seem to follow a very stringent approach in order to protect public competition law enforcement. The article summarizes the most relevant case-law and new provisions of the Damages Directive and presents practical issues with respect to its implementation from the Polish perspective

scholarly journals Transparency in EU Trade Policy: A Comprehensive Assessment of Current Achievements

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 261-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Marx ◽  
Guillaume Van der Loo
Keyword(s):  
Trade Policy ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Public Access ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
The Public ◽  
Institutional Actors ◽  
The Eu

<p>The EU trade policy is increasingly confronted with demands for more transparency. This article aims to investigate how transparency takes shape in EU trade policy. First, we operationalize the concept of transparency along two dimensions: a process dimension and an actor dimension. We then apply this framework to analysis of EU Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). After analyzing transparency in relation to FTAs from the perspective of the institutional actors (Commission, Council and Parliament), the different instruments and policies that grant the public actors (civil society and citizens) access to information and documents about EU FTAs are explored by discussing Regulation 1049/2001, which provides for public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, and the role of the European Ombudsman. The article is based on an analysis of official documents, assessments in the academic literature and case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The ultimate aim is to assess current initiatives and identify relevant gaps in the EU’s transparency policies. This article argues that the EU has made significant progress in fostering transparency in the negotiation phase of FTAs, but less in the implementation phase.</p>

scholarly journals To Filter or Not to Filter? That Is the Question in EU Copyright Reform

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giancarlo Frosio
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Digital Environment ◽  
Negative Externalities ◽  
Liability Rule ◽  
The Public ◽  
Alternative Proposal ◽  
Intermediary Liability ◽  
The Eu

This article discusses the proposed introduction in EU law of an obligation for hosting providers to conclude licencing agreements with copyright holders and ensure their functioning by taking effective technological measures — such as content id technologies — to prevent copyright infringement on online platforms. This proposal is included in Article 13 — and accompanying Recitals — of the European Commission’s Draft Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market of September 14, 2016, which forms an important part of the ongoing EU copyright reform. This article highlights the shortcoming of this proposed reform, which might fall short in terms of clarity, consistency with the EU acquis, appropriacy and proportionality. In doing so, the article discusses recent CJEU case law — such as GSMedia, Ziggo and Filmspeler — struggling with the notion of communication to the public in the digital environment. It highlights systemic inconsistencies between the traditional knowledge-and-take-down negligence-based intermediary liability system and the introduction of filtering and monitoring obligations. The article examines the appropriacy of filtering — and monitoring — measures within a fundamental rights perspective by considering proportionality between property rights’ enforcement and competing fundamental rights — such as freedom of expression, freedom of business and privacy. The critical review of the proposed reform serves as an opportunity to briefly advance an alternative proposal seeking a more pragmatical engagement with technological change through an arrangement enforcing a liability rule or an apportionment of profits and producing value for creators out of platform economy’s virality, while limiting negative externalities on users’ rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document