ARTICLES : EUROPEAN COMMISSION - FRENCH COMPETITION AUTHORITY - ANTITRUST PRACTICES - PROOF - LENIENCY PROGRAMS - SETTLEMENT PROCEEDINGS - COMMITMENT PROCEEDINGS

The impact of "alternatives procedures" in the anti-competitive practices establishment before the Competition Authority and the European Commission

The present study aims to identify if leniency programs, settlement proceedings and commitment proceedings have an impact on the definition and the proof of antitrust practices before the European Commission and the French Competition Authority.

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. 1. Unlike their North American counterparts, European competition authorities (the ³cauthorities³d) have only recently been granted the right to induce, by way of reduced penalties, defendants to drop infringement proceedings instituted to fully comply with the requirements of the right to a fair trial. The complexity of the competition rules and the need for the authorities to establish, under judicial supervision, the constituent elements of anti-competitive practices, as well as the rules of evidence, may in particular have justified this. 2. The determination of legislators and/or authorities to make the fight against cartels more effective by making it

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

  • Nest Avocats (Paris)

Quotation

Eric David, The impact of "alternatives procedures" in the anti-competitive practices establishment before the Competition Authority and the European Commission, February 2011, Concurrences N° 1-2011, Art. N° 33859, pp. 67-81

Visites 2361

All reviews