The EU Court of Justice upholds that a regulation introducing a system of compulsory training for chartered accountants may fall within the scope of the interdiction in Article 101(1) TFEU (OTOC)

Anticompetitive behaviour by professional regulators – Wouters naturalised* The ECJ’s judgment in Case C-309/99 Wouters – that the Dutch legal regulator was an association of undertakings for the purposes of competition law, but that its prohibition on partnerships between lawyers and accountants nevertheless fell outside Article 101(1) having regard to its context and objectives – was a controversial one. To some it suggested the emergence in European competition law of a “rule of reason”. Professor Whish preferred to treat it as an example of a standalone doctrine of “regulatory ancillarity” that enabled the courts to overlook the incidentally anticompetitive effects of primarily regulatory measures. Whatever the explanation, it was clear that the ECJ had introduced a doctrine which cut

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • Blackstone Chambers (London)

Quotation

Tom Cleaver, The EU Court of Justice upholds that a regulation introducing a system of compulsory training for chartered accountants may fall within the scope of the interdiction in Article 101(1) TFEU (OTOC), 28 February 2013, e-Competitions Bulletin February 2013, Art. N° 61873

Visites 47

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues