PresentationsWelcome and Introductory Remarks
Nathalie Jalabert-Doury, Partner, Mayer Brown, Paris
While competition investigations have not been subject to major reform in the recent period, practice and case law are constantly evolving on the main points of confrontation between the rights of companies and the investigative powers of the authorities.
In practice, the authorities are adapting to changes in working tools. Computer seizures are more than ever at the heart of the authorities’ investigations, and the annual conference of the International Competition Network, which took place a few days ago in Singapore, provided an opportunity to take stock of the latest developments, whether in terms of the refinement of screening methods or the clues that the authorities do not hesitate to look for today on the Internet, including on social networks.
Two recent developments in case law should also be noted. Thus, on 4 May 2016, the Court of Cassation referred a priority constitutionality question (QPC) concerning the Competition Authority’s simple investigative powers and the lack of immediate and autonomous recourse against these investigative measures. A few weeks earlier, the Paris Court of Appeal had, for its part, cancelled a visit and seizure order that had not put forward simple but sufficient presumptions of participation by the target company in the practice under investigation to justify a visit to its premises.
