48 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
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
Undistorted, Un(fair) Competition, Consumer Welfare and the Interpretation of Article 102 TFEU
No full textThis article explains the Lisbon Treaty’s provisions relating to competition policy and offers a dynamic interpretation of Article 102 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which could justify the consideration of an effects-based approach to those anti-competitive practices that are most harmful to the final consumers under the economic theory of consumer welfare. The implications of ‘consumerprotection requirements’ must shed special light on Article 12 TFEU. Therefore, this article examines the possibility of shifting the courts’ teleological interpretation of Article 102, which is based on Protocol 27’s ‘undistorted competition’, towards a legal balancing test of the Treaty’s objectives. It also highlights the interpretation of undistorted competition within the internal market and the interplay between EU ‘free’ and fair and unfair competition rules. The balance of EU competition law should, therefore, be performed between Article 119 TFEU’s free competition or economic freedom-based competition and Article 12 as ensuring a ‘high level of protection’, as embedded in the Treaty, for the final consumers. This article explains how consumer-protection requirements must be defined narrowly so that Article 12 may be applied to Article 102. Article 12 can, therefore, mandate a high level of consumer protection for the final consumers in implementing such a specific policy as the abuse of dominance
Competition Policy's Social Paradox: Are We Losing Sight of the Wood for the Trees?
No full textThe present contribution seeks to provide a normative justification for the better consideration of employment and its negative social consequences in the area of mergers. First, it challenges the widespread rhetoric of competition policy when advancing economic efficiency as a goal of competition policy. Second, it argues that the promotion of efficiency-driven, fierce competition comes at the expense of other sensible social values, such as job creation. As evidenced by statistics, this contribution unravels how job cuts follow from mergers and acquisitions. It argues (i) in favour of an overhaul of the efficiency defence with the aim of focusing more actively on job creation, or at least on balancing the number of job cuts with the number of newly created jobs and (ii) against anti-competitive practices such as social dumping and camouflage
Review of Kiran Klaus Patel and Heike Schweitzer (eds), The historical foundations of EU competition law (Oxford University Press 2013)
No full text
Accesul la Facilităţi Esenţiale: O Perspectivă Comparativă a Dreptului Concurenţei Comerciale Referitoare la Folosirea Comună şi Cazuri Recente Privind Preţurile Forfetare
No full textPrezenta contribuţie are ca scop o prezentare comparativă succintă a cadrului juridic al accesului la facilităţi esenţiale în dreptul european, roman şi german al concurenţei comerciale, precum şi a elementelor cheie în tratarea unor astfel de cazuri. Ea evidenţiază îndeosebi cele mai recente evoluţii practice în cauza Scadlines, în particular circumstanţele excepţionale privind acordarea accesului, şi explică dificultăţile practice de a conveni asupra stabilirii unei despăgubiri corespunzătoare. Contribuţia se încheie cu câteva exemple recente din dreptul european şi german al concurenţei privind preţurile forfetare (margin squeeze)
Legal Interpretation and Practice versus Legal Theory: A Reconciliation of Competition Goals and a Reply to Andriychuk
No full text
