30 research outputs found
The Disclosure of Evidence Under the ‘Antitrust Damages’ Directive 2014/104/EU
No full textThe aim of this contribution is to reflect on the principles underpinning the disclosure of evidence under Directive 2014/104/EU, namely the principles of proportionality, effectiveness, equivalence and consistency. It also aims to review the legislative techniques that the Directive has used in order to codify the previous case law of the European Union (EU) courts and to discuss several recent rulings, including Carglass, Pilkington, Evonik Degussa and others. Finally, the author draws conclusions on the adequacy of the achieved codification of the previous case law on the disclosure of evidence and access to such evidence, as well as on its potential implications for the Member States. This contribution is based on a presentation delivered at the 4th Petar Šarčević international conference on ‘EU Competition and State Aid Rules: Interaction between Public and Private Enforcement’ in Rovinj, Croatia. The author would like to thank the organisers of the wonderful conference, the editors and commentators, especially Vlatka Butorac Malnar, Judges Vesna Tomljenović, Marc Jaeger, Viktor Kreuschitz and Miro Prek, and also Marc Barennes and Nuria Bermejo Gutierrez
Abuse of Global Platform Dominance or Competition on the Merits?
No full textContrary to mainstream opinion, suggesting that dominant online platforms compete on their own merits and that their abuse of the large-scale accumulation of data should fall under data or privacy laws, this article argues that competition law should investigate whether global platform competition has been established on merit alone and how digital dominance has been strengthened through the downfall of emerging competition (the exclusionary harm) and the excessive combination of individuals' data (exploitative harm). To frame the theory of competitive harm in a global context, this article compares several of the most recent cases involving digital giants such as Google, Facebook, and Amazon in both pro-active jurisdictions, as well as in less interventionist jurisdictions. In doing so, the author challenges the existing categorization of abuse of a dominant position, especially self-preferencing and the excessive disclosure of data. This article advances the constitutional dimension of competition law by recognizing the principle of nondiscrimination and equal treatment in Google Shopping and the principle of autonomous self-determination in Facebook as embedded in quasi-constitutional EU freedoms of free and fair competition for businesses and free choice for consumers
Procedural Rights in EU Administrative Competition Proceedings: Ex Ante Mergers
No full textThe present contribution has two inter-related purposes: first, to analyse the context and legal framework of procedural rights in EU competition law, in particular, the administrative notification of mergers, and second, to critically review any perceived flaws in the substantive, institutional design or exercise of these procedural rights in practice, thereby offering proposals for institutional reform
Legal Interpretation and Practice versus Legal Theory: A Reconciliation of Competition Goals and a Reply to Andriychuk
No full text
The Interplay between Free Movement of Goods/Services and Competition Law: object/effect restrictions of competition on free trade
No full text
