1. Competition law provides fertile ground for negotiation as it, by its nature, pits conflicting positions arising from clashing interests. This tension is intrinsic to the discipline. A considerable number of negotiated decisions (cartel settlements, settlements in actions for damages, commitment decisions, or remedies) are taken in the shadow of courts, in the Berlaymont building of the European Commission, at competition authorities’ premises or at multinational headquarters (for the settlement of private actions [1]). 2. However, in spite of the increasing prominence of those decisions, awareness about the importance of negotiation skills is still limited within the competition law community. [2] We are still a long way behind the United States, where negotiation is a legal
Share on
|
|
LEGAL PRACTICE: EUROPEAN UNION - COMPETITION POLICY - NEGOTIATIONS - VERTICAL NEGOTIATIONS - HORIZONTAL NEGOTIATIONS - PRINCIPLED NEGOTIATIONS - CARTELS - MERGERS
Negotiation: In the shadow of competition law
The article explores a crucial but still unexplored dimension of competition law - negotiation. It discusses the two types of negotiations in competition law, namely, vertical (negotiation in the asymmetry of power) and horizontal (arm’s length negotiation), then it delves into the lessons from US-pioneered “principled negotiation”, in particular, those applicable to asymmetric negotiations between enterprises and regulators.
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.
