Search results - Concurrences

6 Nov 2020 R

India: Supreme Court on competition law - Decisions that shaped the decade

Soumya Hariharan, Sakshi Agarwal, Akrathi Shetty • N° 4-2020

The evolution and journey of competition law jurisprudence in India has been extremely dynamic and exciting. The Competition Act, 2002 was implemented in a phased manner and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India over the last decade has laid down landmark judgements across a wide spectrum of (...)

6 Nov 2020 R

USA: Does a federal price gouging law even make sense—and, if so, what should it look like?

Michelle K. Fischer, Tiffany D. Lipscomb-Jackson • N° 4-2020

As COVID-19 continues to impact communities across the United States—causing many state and local authorities to extend (or reinstate) emergency orders and other state-specific pricing restrictions—the idea of federal price gouging legislation has become a hot topic of conversation in the U.S. (...)

1 Nov 2020 R

Croatia: Topical issues in the current competition law

Siniša Petrović, Marijana Liszt, Petra Kontić • N° 4-2020 • pp. 258-263

This paper discusses current developments in competition law in Croatia by reviewing some of the most relevant issues in these unprecedented times. One of them concerns the recent decisions of the Croatian Constitutional Court by which several judgments of the Administrative Court were quashed. (...)

1 Nov 2020 R

China: Conglomerate mergers are facing heightened scrutiny

Cheng Liu, Audrey Yumeng Li, Nick Torres • N° 4-2020

For the past three years (2017–2020), it appears that conglomerate mergers were under more scrutiny in China than in the European Union (“EU”) or the United States (“U.S.”). This article mainly examines five mergers—namely, HP/Samsung, Essilor/Luxottica, KLA/Orbotech, Infineon/Cypress and (...)

1 Sep 2020 R

Chile: A hybrid competition law and policy model

Umut Aydin, Javier Tapia • N° 3-2020 • pp. 204-208

This article presents a brief overview of the Chilean competition law and policy and analyses its current state of enforcement. We argue that the Chilean system is a mix between the United States and European Union competition regimes. It relies on decisions by a specialized competition (...)

1 Sep 2020 R

USA: We’ve seen enough – It is time to abandon Amex and start over on two-sided markets

Randy Stutz • N° 3-2020

When a U.S. district court recently applied the U.S. Supreme Court’s Ohio v. American Express (“Amex”) opinion to an antitrust merger challenge in the airfare distribution industry, the analysis led to the absurd conclusion that market definition requires courts to ignore existing competition. The (...)

1 Sep 2020 R

USA: Is the wind really turning? Towards an overhaul of US antitrust through compliance programs and deferred prosecution agreements

Nils Monnerie • N° 3-2020 • pp. 198-203

’Does the Flap of a Butterfly’s Wings in Brazil Set off a Tornado in Texas?’ Predictability is a central issue for the risk practitioner. In this study, it will be highlighted that the flapping of the wings of a division of the US Department of Justice can have important consequences for the (...)

1 May 2020 R

Africa: Harmonising competition policy under the AfCFTA

Kamala Dawar, George Lipimile • N° 2-2020 • pp. 242-250

This article examines the process of harmonisation of competition law and policy in Africa in the context of economic integration under the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA). The article undertakes a comparative examination of the various stages of development of domestic (...)

1 May 2020 R

Japan: Shrinking market doctrine for aging stagnant economies? The JFTC 2019 revision of merger guidelines

Masako Wakui • N° 2-2020

While Japan is aging rapidly and the local communities in rural areas are struggling to maintain their essential societal function, the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) has revised the merger guidelines to allow for mergers that create a monopoly. Under the new approach, which the author (...)

1 May 2020 R

India: Trends and evolution in bid-rigging cartels

Soumya Hariharan, Nandita Sahai, Sakshi Agarwal, Akrathi Shetty • N° 2-2020

Cartels have been at the forefront of the Competition Commission of India’s (CCI) enforcement regime. This article assesses the elements of bid rigging cartels, constituents that create a case for bid rigging, the CCI’s approach in India based on the standard of proof adopted and evidentiary (...)

1 May 2020 R

OECD: Second Competition Open Day (Paris, 26 February 2020)

Pedro Gonzaga, Lynn Robertson, Ania Thiemann, Cristina Volpin • N° 2-2020

At the Second OECD Competition Open Day, the OECD launched the first edition of the OECD Competition Trends which provides unique insights into global competition trends based on analysis of data from more than 50 OECD and non-OECD jurisdictions. Sessions discussed competition in the digital (...)

1 Feb 2020 R

Belgium: The new Book IV of the Code of Economic Law – Dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s in competition law rules

Caroline Cauffman • N° 1-2020

An Act of 2 May 2019 replaced the entire Book IV of the Code of Economic Law containing the Belgian rules of competition law. Nevertheless, content-wise, the changes are rather limited. The most important changes concern the confidentiality of documents, the improvement of the position of the (...)

1 Feb 2020 R

EU: The criminalisation of competition law breaches - Another attempt to square the circle?

Kane Abry-Diaw de Baye • N° 1-2020

This article explores the mechanisms that some Member States of the European Union have put in place to criminalise the enforcement of competition law. It highlights the rationale behind the criminalisation of competition law breaches in those few European countries that have chosen to (...)

1 Feb 2020 R

Poland: Regulation on unfair contractual practices in the food retail sector – An answer to inefficient private enforcement or an example of good regulation?

Joanna Affre, Małgorzata Kozak • N° 1-2020

The article focuses on relatively new law in Poland aimed at elimination of unfair commercial practices in relations between undertakings in the agricultural and food products supply chain, thus at protection of weaker players - farmers and small suppliers. The Act on counteracting the unfair (...)

1 Feb 2020 R

Serbia: Reflections on the new State aid regime

Dušan Mitrović • N° 1-2020

On October 10, 2019, Serbian parliamentarians have voted in favour of adopting the new State Aid Control Act. In the past ten years, the enforcement activity in the field of State aid in Serbia has been somewhat subpar. The legal community still awaits the first decision of the State aid (...)

1 Nov 2019 R

Netherlands: Recent developments in cartel damages actions – A roadmap for effective compensation

Joost A. Möhlmann, Mark R. Fidder, Till Schreiber • N° 4-2019 • pp. 208-218

Over the last decade, the Netherlands have become one of the preferred forums for private enforcement in the European Union. A large number of cartel damages cases have been brought before the Dutch courts, often by litigation vehicles or a multitude of prejudiced parties, which has resulted in (...)

1 Nov 2019 R

Digital antitrust: An emerging consensus?

James Mancini • N° 4-2019

An increasing number of jurisdictions are considering adjustments to their competition policy framework to reflect the unique challenges of digitalisation. Indeed, several studies have been formally commissioned on the subject. While their legal context, focus and findings vary significantly; (...)

1 Nov 2019 R

Brexit: Balancing UK and EU merger control

Joel Bamford, Aiste Slezeviciute • N° 4-2019

The merger control regime in the United Kingdom (UK) and at the European level is increasingly under the spotlight. In the UK, a key factor is the UK’s exit from the European Union (Brexit), where, as a consequence, the UK is likely to lose the benefit of the “one-stop shop” under the EU Merger (...)

1 Sep 2019 R

Singapore: Grab/Uber merger – Observations from the CCCS’s first interim measures directions and merger infringement decisions

Harikumar Pillay, Lip Hang Poh • N° 3-2019

In September 2018, the CCCS (Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore) issued its infringement decision on the merger between Grab and Uber, the first merger infringement decision issued by the authority since the prohibition came into force in July 2007. This was also the first case in (...)

1 Sep 2019 R

Brazil: Compliance programs and abuse of dominance practices under Brazilian competition law – A roadmap for compliance monitors

Victor Oliveira Fernandes • N° 3-2019 • pp. 216-227

The Brazilian antitrust authority (Portuguese acronym CADE) has been following a worldwide trend in encouraging the adoption of competition law compliance programs. Nevertheless, one can see an apparent policy gap in the current optimal incentives for compliance program adoption in antitrust (...)

1 Sep 2019 R

UK: Why not call a margin squeeze a margin squeeze?

Pietro Crocioni • N° 3-2019

At the end of October 2018, Ofcom issued its first abuse of dominance infringement decision and fine under the Competition Act 1998 against Royal Mail. Perhaps surprisingly, Ofcom did not examine the behaviour as either a margin squeeze or a refusal to supply, the types of cases one would (...)

1 May 2019 R

Poland: Enforcement of vertical restraints in Poland - Practitioner’s insight

Małgorzata Modzelewska de Raad • N° 2-2019

The article discusses the law and the decisional as well as judicial practice in the area of Polish competition law related to the vertical agreements. The paper puts the issue in the perspective of the overall activity of the Polish NCA and presents a close-up to the vertical restrains. It (...)

1 May 2019 R

French Polynesia: Revision of the competition code - Towards a better inclusion of the economic analysis

Florent Venayre • N° 2-2019

The French Polynesian Competition Code was recently modified by a law promulgated on August 2018. Using results from a conference held at the University of French Polynesia, this law introduces some important amendments in the French Polynesian competition law and its enforcement procedures. (...)

1 May 2019 R

USA/EU: The convergence and specifics of EU competition law and American antitrust law regarding the prohibition of price scissors as constitutive of abuse of dominance

Kane Abry-Diaw de Baye • N° 2-2019

In this paper, the author reports on how the European and American Competition Authorities apprehend margin squeeze, viz. the fact for dominant undertakings operating simultaneously as vertically-integrated entities and as downstream market participants to increase wholesale prices by reducing (...)

1 May 2019 R

South Africa: Competition Amendment Act - A risk or a boon for South Africa’s economy?

Julie Tirtiaux • N° 2-2019 • pp. 214-222

The South African Competition Amendment Act introduces significant changes to redress excessive concentration of ownership and promote the participation of small and medium businesses, and firms controlled by historically disadvantaged persons. The objective of creating a more inclusive economy (...)

1 Feb 2019 R

Peru: Competition law enforcement - Reaching maturity

Andres Calderon Lopez • N° 1-2019 • pp. 228-233

This article describes the most recent changes and trends in Peru’s competition law enforcement. After presenting an overview of Peru’s competition law and policy, the author depicts the evolution of Indecopi (Peru’s competition authority) in its fight against horizontal collusion and shows (...)

1 Feb 2019 R

India: Remedies in merger cases

John Handoll • N° 1-2019

No notified combination has to date been prohibited by the Competition Commission of India (CCI). However, the clearance of some 30 combinations has been subject to the parties implementing structural or non-structural (behavioural) remedies. This article outlines the sometimes innovative (...)

1 Feb 2019 R

Turkey: Innovation-based analysis of mergers

Gönenç Gürkaynak, Naz Topaloglu • N° 1-2019

Innovation can either be viewed by the competition authorities as a parameter that should be protected from the potential negative effects of a transaction, or it can be utilized by the merging parties as part of a defense argument to set off against or abate the anti-competitive concerns (...)

1 Nov 2018 R

Abuse of dominance and big tech: An Apple Store case after the Google Android case?

Walid Chaiehloudj • N° 4-2018 • pp. 215-222

For the second year in a row, the European Commission has fined Google for abuse of dominance. In the Android case, the company was sentenced for imposing contractual restrictions that stifled competition on the market. This Android case is very similar to the Apple Store case currently pending (...)

1 Sep 2018 R

Turkey: Dynamic efficiency considerations in merger control analyses

Çağlagül Koz, Gönenç Gürkaynak, Naz Topaloglu • N° 3-2018

The final destination and the ultimate goal that we put forth in our article is that the Turkish Competition Board should include innovation considerations in its merger control analyses by employing dynamic tools. Accordingly, we contend that the Turkish Competition Board should “set its course (...)

1 May 2018 R

UK: Brexit - The need for a special approach to EU mergers

Ronan Scanlan • N° 2-2018

The United Kingdom (UK) is expected to leave the European Union (EU) in the near future. When it does so, mergers affecting both the EU and the UK will lose the benefit of the “one stop shop” under the EU Merger Regulation (EUMR) and the European Commission (the Commission) will have no right or (...)

1 May 2018 R

India: Cartel enforcement – The past, the present and the future

Kalyani Singh, Karan Singh Chandhiok, Sarthak Pande • N° 2-2018 • pp. 216-223

This article provides a primer on the latest trends and developments dealing with cartel enforcement and regulation in India. The article will cover the legislative provision in India regulating cartels, case law developments and future trends based on the current enforcement trends. I. (...)

1 Feb 2018 R

Brazil: Common ownership by institutional investors and its impact on competition

Amanda Athayde, Mônica Fujimoto • N° 1-2018 • pp. 218-224

Brazilian capital markets have experienced a significant increase in the engagement of institutional investors (including investment funds), despite the fact intertwined companies or those with family control are still dominant in the country. In this sense, one must question whether (...)

1 Feb 2018 R

Poland: Public interest and a place for non-competition considerations in Polish competition law

Maciej Bernatt, Marcin Mleczko • N° 1-2018

The article attempts to answer the question: to what extent can non-competition considerations play a role in the application of Polish competition law? Background analysis of EU competition law is also provided. Attention is focused on the meaning of ‘public interest’ invoked in Article 1 of the (...)

1 Nov 2017 R

Germany: The Bundeskartellamt’s new Guidance on Remedies in Merger Control (May 2017)

Markus Welzenbach • N° 4-2017 • pp. 200-209

On May 30th, the Bundeskartellamt published its Guidance on Remedies in Merger Control in order to explain the requirements that need to be met for the authority to clear a concentration that would significantly impede effective competition subject to remedies. This article covers the specific (...)

1 Nov 2017 R

China/EU: The gradual evolution of the EU Commission’s merger control decisional practice towards SOEs amidst an increasingly protectionist world

Camille Puech-Baron, Kyriakos Fountoukakos • N° 4-2017

This article has been nominated for the 2018 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. This article updates the article published by the authors in 2012 on the treatment of Chinese SOEs involved in acquisitions of European companies under the EU (...)

1 Nov 2017 R

China: Ten years of Anti-Monopoly Law - Its review and prospect

Jiang Wan • N° 4-2017

China AML was promulgated ten years ago. The prospective of China AML appeared limited but steady progress in competition policy, legal system, enforcement, international cooperation and so on. This essay looked back past decade of China AML and provided some predictions and expectations. 1. (...)

1 Sep 2017 R

Switzerland: Prohibition of parallel imports and market integration - The role of the “effects doctrine” and the development of the substantive laws

Pranvera Këllezi • N° 3-2017 • pp.185-192

Possible effects in Switzerland are sufficient to assert jurisdiction of Switzerland over conduct taking place outside Switzerland. The Supreme Court adopted a broad definition of the territorial scope of the Cartel Act, by not only refusing, but also prohibiting, to consider any level of (...)

1 Sep 2017 R

UK: Role of trustees in the merger control regime

Michel van Zundert, Nasoul Gopal • N° 3-2017

Competition agencies worldwide appoint monitoring trustees (MTs) when competition concerns arise from a merger. In the UK, it also is quite common to appoint a MT during the CMA’s review process to avoid gun jumping or enable (cross-border) integration. This article compares the role of the MT (...)

1 Sep 2017 R

Brazil: Competition policy five years later - Still in search of better practices?

Vinicius Marques de Carvalho • N° 3-2017

The article proposes the adoption of a "better practices" framework for evaluating public policies and institutions, with a focus on the implementation of competition policy. After identifying central variables directed at that purpose, I turn to the Brazilian case. Brazil invested in a method (...)

1 May 2017 R

U.S.A.: A quick look at the legal standards for loyalty discounts

Mariateresa Maggiolino • N° 2-2017

At present, in the United States no final word has been spoken as to the law on loyalty discounts. On the one hand, many U.S. courts assess loyalty discounts under the predatory pricing test, which is a defendant-friendly and easy-to-administer test that saves every discount above a certain (...)

1 May 2017 R

Germany: Changes made by the Ninth Amendment to the German Act Against Restraints of Competition

Per Rummel, Thomas Weck • N° 2-2017 • pp. 208-214

This article analyses the legal modifications by the ninth amendment to the German Competition Act. Partly, the changes were necessary to transpose European rules on administrative and civil liability. Moreover, the German legislator attunes the competition law to the challenges of the digital (...)

1 May 2017 R

Ireland: “Out of step” - Coping with its constitutional concerns about civil fines

Mary Catherine Lucey • N° 2-2017

The absence of civil fines in Ireland means that it is ‘out of step’ with most other EU Member States. This article explains how the Irish Constitution affects the design of the public enforcement model. It highlights several steps that have been taken by the legislature to strengthen public (...)

1 Feb 2017 R

USA : The role of economic analysis in the assessment of vertical restraints

Howard P. Marvel, Kıvanç A. Kırgız • N° 1-2017

This article has been nominated for the 2018 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Vertical restraints commonly serve as devices to establish property rights to customers generated by costly promotional efforts. In some cases, rights to (...)

1 Feb 2017 R

A British perspective: EU antitrust law and international damages actions

Peter Roth • N° 1-2017 • pp. 243-248

This article discusses a variety of issues concerning international competition law damages claims which have been considered in cases in England. They include: the problem of mass claims for foreign plaintiffs; the liability of a local subsidiary for infringements by a foreign parent; the (...)

1 Nov 2016 R

Laos: The Lao PDR lays the foundation for its competition regime

David Fruitman • Nº 4-2016

On July 14th, 2015, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic enacted its competition law. The law introduces the basic framework of the competition regime including the standard pillars of competition law (mergers, cartels and abuses of dominant position) as well as unfair trade practices. The (...)

1 Nov 2016 R

China: An overview of intellectual property rights guidelines and global considerations for antitrust practitioners

Christopher B. Hockett, Jesse Solomon • Nº 4-2016

Anti-Monopoly Commission (“AMC”) has charged four Chinese state agencies with developing guidelines on when IPR-related conduct violates China’s Anti-Monopoly Law. So far, two of those agencies—the NDRC, which oversees price-related conduct, and the SAIC, which oversees non-price-related (...)

1 Nov 2016 R

Brexit: Increased scope for intervention in takeovers of UK businesses?

Dominic Long • Nº 4-2016

This paper discusses the implications of Brexit on the ability of the UK Government to intervene in cross-border mergers to protect domestic ‘strategic interests’ of the kind identified by the Prime Minister in her speech in July (in which she argued that “a proper industrial strategy wouldn’t (...)

1 Nov 2016 R

Germany: Selective distribution and market places

Franck Audran • Nº 4-2016 • pp. 221-226

Many discussions concerning e-commerce of products marketed via a selective distribution network are still carried on in the context of the Commission sectorial inquiry’s preliminary findings. This article deals with the recent evolutions that selective distribution faced and especially reviews (...)

1 Sep 2016 R

A glimpse into Brazil’s experience in international cartel investigations: Legal framework, investigatory powers and recent developments in leniency and settlements policy

Amanda Athayde, Marcela Fernandes • Nº 3-2016

This article analyzes the Brazilian experience in international cartels enforcement within 2000-2016. Initially, it presents four central aspects of the enforcement activities in Brazil. First, the legal framework on fighting cartels. Second, the main investigatory powers of the Brazilian (...)

total	138
total_found	138
time	0.165

Your search returned 138 results Review International

Debug

Métas associées