Competition journals: July - Oct. 2007

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article.

1. General - Scope of application

The notary seized by Community law (XV Notarial-University Meeting), D. Fasquelle (Petites affiches, 29 August 2007, No. 173, p. 30)

In this paper, written on the occasion of the XVth Notarial-University Meeting, Daniel Fasquelle tries to convince notaries and representatives of the profession, after a particularly welcome overview, of the importance of taking a constructive stance with regard to the application of Community law, and in particular Community competition law, to the activity of notaries, which, moreover, is hardly a matter of doubt, especially as the risks are not as great as is sometimes feared. The author thus urges the profession to take the lead in a change in status that has become inevitable. He suggests to the countries of Latin law to draw up a statute for the European notary that would be valid for all the countries that would adopt it.

The Industrial Organization of Markets with Two-Sided Platforms, D. Evans and R. Schmalensee (Competition Policy International, Spring 2007, Vol. 3, Issue 1, p. 151).

The symposium entitled "Antitrust analysis of multi-sided platforms" in general, and this contribution in particular, are an opportunity to welcome the new issue of Competition Policy International, which, in addition to being freely accessible at www.globalcompetitionpolicy.org, is once again of an excellent standard. In this first paper, the authors give a clear and precise presentation of the state of economic analysis, case law and, above all, the particular competitive implications of the two-sided markets that are the subject of the symposium. They then develop the issues of the relevant market and market power, coordinated practices and, for unilateral practices, pricing practices, coupling and exclusivities). But this theme of two-sided markets is a rich one and the dozen contributions study many aspects of it, from a theoretical point of view, as in Two-Sided Platform Markets and the Application of the Traditional Antitrust Analytical Framework by R. B. Hesse (p. 191), from a specific issue perspective, as in A. Fletcher’s short but clarifying Predatory Pricing in Two-Sided Markets: A Brief Comment (p. 221), or by sector, as in Are Media Markets Analyzed as Two-Sided Markets? by J. Wotton (p. 237).

Are Article 82 EC and Intellectual Property Interoperable? The State of the Law Pending the Judgment in Microsoft v. Commission, M. Dolmans, R. O’Donoghue, and P.-J. Loewenthal (Competition Policy International, Spring 2007, Vol. 3, Issue 1, p. 107).

Evaluating market power using competitive benchmark prices rather than the Herfindahl-Hirschman index (Symposium "The application of empirical economics to antitrust"), J. A. Hausman and J. G. Sidak (Antitrust Law Journal, 2007, Vol. 74, Issue 2, p. 387).

Market Definition: use and abuse, D. Carlton (Competition Policy International, Spring 2007, Vol. 3, Issue 1, p. 3).

La politique de la concurrence dans le domaine de l’énergie à travers la pratique décisionnelle récente de la Commission, O. Guersent (RLC 2007/12, n° 813, p. 9)

"Competition", the word that annoys..., L. Idot (Europe, August-September 2007, Alerts, 49, p. 3)

Sports Law and Competition, E. Honorat (AJDA, 10 Sept. 2007,No. 30, p. 1631)

Conseil de la concurrence : les juridictions de contrôle veillent, N. Jalabert-Doury (Les Echos, 5 Sept. 2007, p. 12)

Enforcement of competition law in the field of intellectual property rights, P. Arhel (Petites affiches, 16 Jul. 2007, No. 141, p. 6)

Activity of the Competition Council: the report, P. Arhel (Petites affiches, 10 August 2007, No. 160, p. 13)

Activity of the Community Courts in competition law (April-May 2007), P. Arhel (Petites affiches, 3 September 2007, No 176, p. 6)

Activity of the Paris Court of Appeal in the field of anti-competitive practices (April-December 2006), P. Arhel (Petites affiches, 18 June 2007, n° 121, p. 7); (from January to May 2007) (Petites affiches, 21 Sept. 2007, n° 190, p. 6)

Activity of the Cour de cassation and the Conseil d’État in competition law (first quarter 2007), P. Arhel (Petites affiches, 15-16 August 2007, No. s 163-164, p. 3)

Gazette de droit de la concurrence, edited by J. Philippe and T. Janssens (Pal. Gaz., 15-16 June 2007, p. 2-39; Pal. Gaz., 22-25 August 2007, p. 2-29)

Chronique Droit de la Concurrence, L. Idot and C. Prieto (DRC 2007/3, Jul. 2007, p. 763)

Chronique Concurrence, L. Idot (Europe, May 2007, comm. 142-144; June 2007, comm. 166-167; Aug.-Sep. 2007, comm. 216-220; Oct. 2007, comm. 260-265)

Chronique concurrence, M. Bazex, G. Decocq and M. Malaurie-Vignal (Contrats, conc., consom., July 2007, p. 21; August-September 2007, p. 26; Oct. 2007, p. 18)

Chronique Concurrence (RJDA, Aug.-Sep. 2007, p. 841; Oct. 2007, p. 983)

Chronique Concurrence-Distribution, D. Ferrier (D. 2007, p. 1911)

Chronique annuelle de jurisprudence communautaire, F. Malvasio (RJEP, n° 644, July 2007, p. 254)

Chronique de droit économique, C. Anadon (RLDA June 2007, n° 1033 to 1037, p. 50; Sept. 2007, n° 1181 to 1185, p. 53)

2. Agreements

2.1. General

Technological progress in the treatment of contractual agreements, C. Prieto (RIDE 2007, vol. 21, issue 3, p. 317).

Purchase price fixing: a per se infringement, I. Kokkoris (ECLR, Sept. 2007, Vol. 28, Issue 9, p. 473).

Cartel regulation under French law: a pragmatic approach, M. Levy et N. Assadi (Global Competition Review - The European antitrust review 2008, p. 95).

Evidence of the cartel agreements (BRDA, 17/07, 15 Sept. 2007, No. 24, p. 13)

Condemnation of the mobile phone cartel: satisfaction in half-tone, C. Prieto (JCP ed. G, No. 37, Sept. 12, 2007, II, 10153, p. 39)

Mobile phone operators and the judge, M. Bazex (Les Echos, 6 Sept. 2007, p. 12)

Collision between sporting ideals and economic contingencies in the MECA-MEDINA judgment, J. Zylberstein (Cah. dr. Eur., 2007 n° 1-2, p. 213)

Artificial electronic reverse auctions (note ss Cons. conc. No. 07-D-26 of 26 Jul. 2007, high-voltage cables), C. Anadon (RLDA 2007/19, No. 1180, p. 49)

2.2. Distribution

Unmasking the Masquerade of Vertical Price Fixing, F. Alese (ECLR, Sept. 2007, Vol. 28, Issue 9, p. 514)

The theme of this article, the assessment of price-fixing in vertical relationships, will certainly occupy a number of authors in the coming months, particularly in view of recent developments in American case law. In this paper, the author provides an economic background and relates the evolution of the law in the United States and in Europe, evoking a number of important jurisprudence, from Dr. Miles to Sylvania. The article ends with an evocation of the Leegin Creative Leather Products decision and the evolution towards the use of a rule of reason and a presumption of legality. See, on the same theme, but mainly oriented towards the latter judgment, Leegin Creative Leather Products: What Does the New Rule of Reason Standard Mean for Resale Price Maintenance Claims, M. L. Faia and S. Sylvania. A. Westrich (Antitrust Source, Aug. 2007, Vol. 6, Issue 6, available at www. abanet.org/antitrust/source).

Qualification of agent under Community competition law (note ss. CJEC 14 Dec. 2006, aff. C-217/05), E. Dieny (JCP éd. E, No. 25, 21 June 2007, 1795, p. 28).

The Competition Council obtains a relaxation of the distribution of cosmetic products on the Internet (note ss. Cons. conc. 8 March 2007), J.-L. Fourgoux (D. 2007, p. 2209)

Encore et toujours la procédure d’engagements au soutien du commerce en ligne dans la distribution sélective, M. Chagny (Comm. com. électr., mai 2007, n° 72, p. 42)

De la qualification du contrat de dépositaire de presse, P. Grignon (RLDA 2007/18, n° 1102, p. 43)

Le contrat de bière : l’exclusivité en voie de disparition forcée ou de l’évolution contrainte d’un mode de distribution, T. Lambert (JCP éd. E, n° 41, 11 oct 2007, 2233, p. 16)

Chronique distribution, M. Malaurie-Vignal (Contracts, conc., consom., June 2007, p. 15; Jul. 2007, p. 19; Aug.-Sep. 2007, p. 21; Oct. 2007, p. 13)

3. Abuse of dominance

Different views on discrimination, C. Webb (ECLR, Nov. 2007, Vol. 28, Issue 11, p. 620).

The author makes a comparative study of two recent judgments, the Attheraces judgment of 2 February 2007 of the English Court of Appeal and the British Airways judgment of 15 March 2007 of the CJEC regarding the assessment of the concept of "competitive disadvantage" provided for in (c) of Article 82 EC on abuse of a dominant position by discrimination. On this point, the first judgment requires proof of this disadvantage where the ECJ infers it from the implementation of discrimination by a dominant undertaking. The solution of the English Court of Appeal is clearly in the author’s favour, and he takes up the arguments in favour of an effects-based approach to this type of practice.

To abuse, or not to abuse: Discrimination between consumers, P. Akman (Eur. Law Rev., 2007, Vol. 32, Issue 4, p. 492).

Competitive advantage and the regulation of dominant firm, R. Boscheck (World Competition, Sept. 2007, Vol. 30, Issue 3, p. 419)

Price squeeze: lessons from the Telecom Italia case, M. Polo (Journal Of Competition Law and Economics, June 2007, Vol. 3, Issue 3, p. 453).

The GlaxoSmithKline case: an update on the sanctioning of predatory pricing (note ss. Cons. conc. 14 March 2007 No. 07-D-09), A. Condomines and Y. Madec (RJDA 7/07, Chron., p. 663).

The opening up of the telecommunications sector to competition continues, M. Chagny (Comm. com. electr., July-August 2007, No 94, p. 35)

Les pratiques contractuelles de l’entreprise en position dominante à l’épreuve du droit de la concurrence, M. Chagny (Comm. com. électr., June 2007, n° 83, p. 38)

Community competition law, between legal certainty and fairness: the example of predatory pricing, N. Ferry-Maccario and J. Bouskila (Gaz. Pal., 8-10 Jul. 2007, p. 32)

Microsoft, a resounding victory for the European Commission, O. Dufour (Petites affiches, 21 Sept. 2007, n° 190, p. 3), accompanied by an interview with Michel Debroux: "It is a success for the Commission in the field of legal and economic analysis"; see also for a more technical analysis by the same author on the same Microsoft Judgment: towards a trivialization of intellectual property in the analysis of abuse of dominance, M. Debroux (Contracts, conc, consom., Oct. 2007, Alerts, No. 47, p. 2). We will see again, but this time on aspects related to the follow-up mechanism of the injunctions imposed by the Commission on Microsoft, which finally led to the annulment of the Commission decision, Premières vues sur l’arrêt Microsoft : comment mettre fin à une super dominance ?, L. Idot (Europe, oct. 2007, Focus, comm. 58, p. 2)

4. Restrictive practices

Trade cooperation and discrimination: can we go all the way (note ss T. com. Nanterre 28 March 2007, Minister of the Economy / Galec), D. Redon (RJDA, Oct. 2007, Chron., p. 885)

Is tariff discrimination which is not justified by actual considerations an abusive practice? Différence d’analyse entre droit et économie ou " un consommateur pris à partie par le droit de la concurrence ", M. Malaurie-Vignal (Contrats, conc., consom., juil. 2007, p. 11)

The reform of the Galland Act: three questions to Didier Ferrier (D. 2007, No. 35, p. 2520)

A brutal rupture of an established commercial relationship: the curious effect of crossing a border on the nature of the action! C. Nourissat (RLDA 2007/19, No. 1193, p. 67)

Le ministre, le juge et le contrat (Réflexions circonspectes à propos de l’article L. 442-6-III du code de commerce, J. Raynard (JCP éd. E, n° 27-28, 5 Jul. 2007, 1864, p. 13)

5. Concentrations

The development of the concept of collective dominance in the ECMR. From it inception to its current status, I. Kokkoris (World Competition, Sept. 2007, Vol. 30, Issue 3, p. 419)

The issue of collective dominance in mergers is a recurring theme in many articles. Among these, the very good article by Ioannis Kokkoris stands out because it offers a complete, problematised and clear view of all the questions asked and the elements of the answers on the subject, from the Fiat Glass and Nestlé judgments to the Impalam decision. The author begins by situating the concept of collective dominance within the general framework of merger control. He then lists as precisely as possible the various criteria necessary for coordinated behaviour on an oligopolistic market, the factors contributing to it and their respective importance according to the sectors. It then presents the jurisprudential assessment that has been made of the most important of these factors, describes the Airtours judgment and the "magic three" (transparency, retaliation mechanisms and consumer competitors) and assesses the Impalam judgment in relation to its predecessor. The author draws from his exhaustive and thoughtful study a series of reflections, in particular on the Commission’s guidelines on horizontal mergers. The author concludes his article by noting that the decisive factor must be the interaction of the different criteria (such as number of firms, market concentration, transparency, etc.) and their combined impact on the post-merger market and that the Commission must always keep in mind not to confuse the normal functioning of an oligopolistic market with oligopolistic dominance.

Time to rethink merger policy, J. Gual (Competition Policy International, Spring 2007, Vol. 3, Issue 1, p. 29).

The following is a critical reflection article on the policy to be followed and the criteria to be put forward in merger control, in which the author develops some counter-current points of view. He makes a negative analysis of unilateral effects, both for the difficulty of measuring them and for the ambiguity of the conclusions to be drawn from them. He doubts that the possible reduction in competition that may result from a merger is necessarily negative in terms of economic welfare, particularly in terms of the incentive to innovate. The author concludes by stressing the delicacy of handling the theoretical nature of economic models in practice.

UK merger remedies under scrutiny, M. Harker (Journal of Business Law, Sept. 2007, p. 620).

The author analyses merger remedies practice in the UK in the light of the recent Sommerfield decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal and in comparison with the US and European guidelines.

Guidelines on French merger control (BRDA, 11/07, 15 June 2007, No 21, p. 11). See also, Updated version of the French Merger Control Guidelines, OD Drafting (JCP ed. E, No. 29, 19 Jul. 2007, 348, p. 3).

Media Concentrations (Competition & Consumer Affairs, No. 154, July-August-Sept. 2007, p. 3)

Revision of the notice on merger remedies, J. Luebking (Competition Policy Newsletter, 2007, No. 2, p. 6).

Schneider/APC: a textbook first-phase case with creation of dominant position and structural remedies, A. Vassileff (Competition Policy Newsletter, 2007, No. 2, p. 51).

6. State aid

Le critère de concomitance des remises de dettes publiques et privées aux entreprises en difficulté, L. Driguez (Petites affiches, 3 August 2007, n° 155, p. 3)

In this article, Laëtitia Driguez questions the ability of the decree implementing the Law of 5 February 2007 on the protection of undertakings, which introduces into French law the rule that any remission of public creditors’ debts to an undertaking in difficulty must be concomitant with a remission of private debts, to guarantee the objective of compatibility of French law with the requirements of Community competition law on State aid. A joint examination of the concomitance criterion as developed in Community case-law and its transposition as a condition in the Decree shows, in its view, that it is not certain that the objective is achieved.

Social housing and European state aid control, A. Bartosch (ECLR, Oct. 2007, Vol. 28, Issue 10, p. 563)

Suspension of the recovery of State aid (note ss CELF judgment with the conclusions of Government Commissioner Claire Landais), D. de Béchillon (AJDA, 2 July 2007, p. 1294)

Fiscal economic interest groupings: the French tax scheme for financing certain capital goods constitutes State aid, B. Jankovec (Competition Policy Newsletter, 2007, No 2, p. 55)

First case of application of the new Community framework for State aid for research, development and innovation: aid from the French Agency for Industrial Innovation to the NeoVal programme, I. Neale-Besson and J.-C. Djelalian (Competition Policy Newsletter, 2007, No. 2, p. 60).

Chronique des aides publiques - 2006, T. Fouquet (RMCUE, June 2007, n° 509, p. 395)

7. Public sector and competition

Anti-competitive practices: the administrative judge invites himself (Competition & Consumer Affairs, No. 154, July-August-September 2007, p. 4)

This paper presents the decision of the Administrative Court of Nantes rendered on December 28, 2006 in the case of the Laval public slaughterhouse, in which it is recalled that the Competition Council had condemned an agreement between the cooperative company operating the public slaughterhouse - STAL - and three companies that are both clients and directors of the cooperative company to prohibit access to the slaughterhouse to the company Ernée Viandes while exonerating the Communauté d’agglomération de Laval (CAL). In addition, the Council had forwarded the case to the public prosecutor on the basis of Article L. 420-6 of the Commercial Code. In this interesting ruling, the Nantes Administrative Court recognized the right of the victim of an anti-competitive practice to claim compensation for damages from a person - in this case the Communauté d’agglomération de Laval (CAL) - who is not the direct perpetrator of the practice, since he or she had been exonerated by the Council. Since it could not ignore the anti-competitive practice which it allowed to be committed, the CAL is liable for its wrongful conduct in the exercise of its power of control vis-à-vis the slaughterhouse operator.

The control of the regulation of airport charges, M. Bazex and S. Blazy (Dr. Admin., No. 7, Jul. 2007, p. 33)

The authors comment on the FNAM ruling of 25 April 2007, in which the Conseil d’État monitored the implementation of the regulatory provisions relating to airport charges resulting from the economic regulation contract concluded between the State and Aéroports de Paris (ADP). This involved, in particular, verifying the level of fees collected by ADP for services rendered to airlines and their service providers. The interest of this judgment lies in the use and admissibility of the applicants in their action for misuse of powers when they are third parties to the contested act, namely the economic regulation contract concluded between the State and ADP fixing the level of fees. Moreover, the reading of this decision is interesting on the merits because the Conseil d’État recalls the conditions for the application of the concept of automatic abuse of a dominant position, even if it sets it aside in the present case. On the other hand, on the question whether the economic regulation contract could constitute State aid granted to ADP, a point which was rejected by the Council in the present case, the authors consider that, if the level of the fees had been set at a level higher than the value of the services provided by ADP, the classification as State aid could have been upheld.

The determination of the amount of royalties for services rendered, M. Bazex and S. Blazy (Dr. Admin., No. 8-9, August-September 2007, p. 39)

The decision of the Council of State of 16 July 2007 (Syndicat national de défense de l’exercice libéral de la médecine à l’hôpital) marks a real turnaround in case law regarding the determination of the value of the fee for services rendered by the public service. Indeed, as the authors note, the Council of State has once again taken account of market rules in public interventions: until now, fees for services rendered were calculated solely on the basis of the charges borne by the Administration to provide the service made available to the beneficiaries. From now on, the Council also takes into account the economic value of the service rendered for its beneficiary, thus incorporating a wide range of possible benefits of all kinds. The position adopted is thus in line with the case law of the ECJ in its recent ruling of 5 July 2007 (case C-181/06).

Conditions of legality of the creation of an exclusive right, N. Boulouis (RJEP, n° 644, July 2007, p. 265)

This article presents the decision of the Council of State of 26 January 2007 (Professional Geomatics Union) and the conclusions of the Government Commissioner Nicolas Boulouis. In this case, the High Court ruled on the legality of a decree granting an exclusive right to the National Geographic Institute (IGN). After validating the competence of the regulatory authority to institute exclusive rights, and considering that the Competition Council had been duly consulted, the Conseil d’État then ruled on the conformity of the exclusive right with Community law. In this case, the exclusive right did not constitute a monopoly on the exercise of an activity: the creation, updating and dissemination of a very precise map (the large-scale reference system - RGE). The exclusive right was limited to obliging the State and public establishments to obtain supplies from the IGN as long as the RGE data provided by the Institute corresponded to their needs, leaving private competitors free to develop products that were equivalent to the RGE. Thus limited, the exclusive right conferred on the IGN was considered by the Conseil d’État to be justified on the basis of Article 86(2) of the EC Treaty relating to the service of general economic interest. The High Court also dismissed the plea alleging infringement of the rules of the public procurement directives. It held that the contracts concluded between the contracting authorities (State, public establishments) and the IGN and relating to the RGE could legitimately be concluded without a call for competition. The text of the Directives provides that they do not apply to contracts between two contracting authorities on the basis of an exclusive right granted under published laws, regulations or administrative provisions, provided that these provisions are compatible with the EC Treaty.

Remarques sur la passation des délégations de service public et les atteintes au droit de la concurrence, J.-P. Jouguelet (RJEP, No. 645, August-September 2007, p. 288).

SNCF is competent to define the consistency of services of national interest, P. Terneyre (RJEP, No 644, July 2007, p. 280).

Les ambiguïtés de la concurrence - Électricité de France et la libéralisation du marché de l’électricité, M. Boiteux, (Futuribles, June 2007, n° 331, p. 5)

Le " droit public de la concurrence ", m. Bazex (Contrats, conc., consom., juil. 2007, p. 1)

Are social services of general interest enterprises, P. Thieffry (AJDA, 9 Jul. 2007, p. 1331)

Promoting solidarity: from public services to a European model of competition, M. Ross (CMLR, 2007, volume 44, issue 4, p. 1057).

Les exigences du droit primaire concernant l’abolition des droits exclusifs ou spéciaux accordés aux entreprises assumant des services publics, Y. Houyet (RTD eur., Apr.-June 2007, p. 253)

Chronique Concurrence : interventions économiques des personnes publiques, M. Bazex, F. Rolin, P. Subra de Bieusses et G. Decocq (Contracts, conc., consom., June 2007, p. 18; August-Sept. 2007, p. 9)

8. Procedures

8.1. General

Burden of proof and control theory in EC competition law: for a change of perspective, A.-L. Sibony and E. Barbier de La Serre (RTD eur., Apr.-June 2007, p. 205)

In a very useful article, Anne-Lise Sibony and Éric Barbier de La Serre invite us to rethink the traditional concepts of burden of proof, standard of proof and standard of review in Community competition law. Starting from the observation that these concepts, which are largely the result of legal interpenetration between Member States, are unable to satisfactorily define the precise limits of the judicial review of Commission decisions, the authors attempt, with the help of illustrations drawn mainly from merger control, if not a new theory of proof in competition law, to lay down at least some guidelines for a better understanding of the problems of allocating the burden of proof and the intensity of judicial review. With regard to the latter aspect, we note the authors’ proposal that the judge should take into account the idea of scenario, or the micro-economic history of the case before him, based on the principle that it is up to the judge to review the evidence, but that it is up to the parties to construct the allegations. In practice, the Commission would, not because of its discretion but because of its position as a party to the proceedings, have the greatest latitude to develop a scenario, i.e. to choose the facts and causal relationships to which it decides to give relevance to account for anti-competitive behaviour. And only if the respondent undertaking manages to demonstrate, by convincing reasoning, that the Commission’s scenario is inconsistent or flawed, will judicial review be more intense.

The Akzo affair: the great disappointment, O. Dufour (Petites affiches, 28 Sept. 2007, No. 195, p. 3)

First presentation of the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities of 17 September 2007 in which the Court of First Instance refused to grant in-house lawyers the benefit of legal privilege. He thus refused, in the ’Akzo’ case, to extend the protection of the confidentiality of a company’s exchanges with its external lawyer to exchanges with the company’s in-house legal advisers. On this point, the decision disappointed the profession, particularly in France. In addition, the Court clarifies the procedure to be followed when, during an audit, an undertaking invokes the confidentiality of certain documents, as well as the material and personal scope of that protection.

De quelques incidences des procédures connexes devant le Conseil de la concurrence, L. Arcelin (Contrats, conc., consom., juin 2007, n° 8, p. 5)

La responsabilité en droit des pratiques anticoncurrentielles des sociétés mères du fait de leurs filiales, G. Decocq (Rev. jur. com. juil.-août 2007, n° 4, p. 281)

Cooperation within the European Competition Network (note ss. CFI 8 March 2007, cases T-339/04 and T-340/04, France Télécom), L. Idot (JCP éd. G, n° 27, 4 Jul. 2007, II, 10124, p. 36).

Consideration of recidivism as an aggravating circumstance in Community competition law (note ss. CJEC 8 February 2007, aff. C-3/06, Danone), J.-C. Zarka (JCP éd. G, n° 27, 4 Jul. 2007, II, 10123, p. 34)

The procedural autonomy of the Member States put to the test the principle of effectiveness of Community law: is the Court an impartial arbiter? (note ss. ECJ 5 October 2006), A. Giraud and D. Tayar (Petites affiches, 4 Jul. 2007, No. 133, p. 8)

Co-operation between competition agencies in cartel investigations, S. Ryan (Competition Policy Newsletter, 2007, No. 2, p. 2).

On the Commission’s leading role in investigating infringements of the competition rules (note ss. CFI 8 March 2007, Case T-339/04), J.-C. Zarka (D. 2007, p. 1738).

8.2. Sanction Policy - Clemency - Settlement - Undertakings

Les procédures alternatives aux sanctions en droit communautaire de la concurrence, C. Vilmart (JCP éd. E, n° 20, 17 May 2007, 1648)

Le droit de la concurrence et les procédures négociées, A. Vialfont (RIDE, 2007, vol. 21, issue 2, p. 157).

Communiqué de procédure du 17 avril 2007 relatif au programme de lémence français : un communiqué remplace l’autre !, E. Claudel (RTD com., Apr.-June 2007, p. 330); see also, Le programme de lémence français à la lumière du communiqué de procédure du Conseil de la concurrence du 17 avril 2007, E. Baccichetti (RLDA 2007/19, n° 1179, p. 44)

L’évaluation du préjudice économique, P. Stoffel-Munck, A. Pinna, G. Decocq, O. Perronnet and M. de Boisséson (Journal des sociétés, June. 2007, n° 44, p. 22-50)

"La pratique des engagements constitue une évolution positive", interview with Me Jacques-Philippe Gunther (Petites affiches, 24 Jul. 2007, No. 147, p. 4).

CNIL and competition: a marriage of reason, D. Roskis, J. Beckhard and C.-M. Dorémus (JCP éd. E, n° 37, Sept. 13, 2007, news, 410, p. 3)

Council approves competition alerts, M. Ponsard (Les Échos, Sept. 26, 2007, p. 13)

La promotion des sanctions civiles en droit des pratiques anticoncurrentielles, V. Lasserre-Kiesow (D. 2007, Chron., p. 2116).

9. Regulations

L’énergie en France au 1er juillet 2007, hésitations autour de la libéralisation et de la privatisation, P. Lignières and R. Lazar (Dr. Admin., n° 8-9, August-Sept. 2007, p. 9)

It is a clear, critical presentation with a permanent perspective of the law of 7 December 2006 on the energy sector, which transposes the directives concerning the opening to competition of the electricity and gas markets, that the authors propose in this article. Indeed, after a reminder of the "chaotic" course of the adoption of this law, they expose in particular the unfavourable market conditions for the opening of the market, in the light of the current litigation opened before the Competition Council against EDF following the referral of the company Direct Energie, and thus raise the issue of the maintenance of regulated tariffs, in view of the procedures underway before the European Commission and the French authorities.

Non-discriminatory use of interconnections applies to current contracts, C. Vérot (RJEP, No. 654, August-September 2007, p. 310).

Particularly instructive and rich are the conclusions of the Government Commissioner in the case between the Italian electricity operator ENEL and CRE before the Council of State. Indeed, the issue at stake is that of the conditions of access to interconnections between the national networks in view of the priorities given to the "historic" long-term contracts of operators who have to guarantee security of supply and concluded before the opening of the European electricity market.

Sectoral authorities and competition authorities: regulatory actors, D. Briand-Mélédo (RIDE 2007, vol. 21, issue 3, p. 345).

Modelling competitive electricity markets: are consumers paying for a lack of competition? P. Chauve and M. Godfried (Competition Policy Newsletter, 2007, No. 2, p. 18).

Sector-specific Regulation and Competition Law in the Electronic Communications Sector Against the Backdrop of the Internal Market, G. Psarakis (ECLR, Aug. 2007, Vol. 28, Issue 8, p. 456).

Le rôle des règles de déontologie entre droit de l’art et régulation du marché, M. Frigo (JDI Clunet, n° 3/2007, p. 883)

Competition and Regulatory Law News, L. Richer, P-A. Jeanneney and S. Nicinski (AJDA, 11 June 2007, p. 1105)

10. International policy

United States courts and the optimal deterrence of international cartels: a welfarist perspective on Empagran, A. K. Klevorick and A. Klevorick. O. Sykes (Journal Of Competition Law and Economics, June 2007, Vol. 3, Issue 3, p. 309).

Competition: Spain aligns itself with Europe - Joining most European countries, Spain is radically reforming its competition law, C. Lemaire and J. Nguyen (Les Echos, 5-6 Oct. 2007, p. 10)

A look at the year 2006 in American antitrust law, J.-C. Roda, (RLC 2007/12, No. 884, p. 176)


LIST OF PERIODIC REMAINS

A.

LEGAL NEWS - ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (AJDA)

NEWS FROM THE NETWORK INDUSTRIES IN EUROPE

ADMINISTRATION AND TERRITORIAL COLLECTIVITIES

AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW

AMERICAN LAW AND ECONOMIC REVIEW

ECONOMIC ANALYSES

ANTITRUST

(THE) ANTITRUST BULLETIN

ANTITRUST LAW JOURNAL

SOURCE ANTITRUST

B.

BANK

BERKELEY TECHNOLOGY LAW JOURNAL

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY GAZETTE

ILEC NEWSLETTER

RAPID BUSINESS LAW BULLETIN (BRDA)

C.

(LES) CAHIERS DE DROIT EUROPEEN

CORPORATE LAW BOOKLETS (FROM THE LAW WEEK)

CHICAGO LAW REVIEW (UNIVERSITY OF)

COMMON MARKET LAW REVIEW

COMMUNICATION - ELECTRONIC COMMERCE

COMMUNICATION & STRATEGIES

COMPETITION AND REGULATION IN NETWORK INDUSTRIES

INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION POLICY

COMPETITION POLICY NEWSLETTER

COMUTER AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS LAW REVIEW

PUBLIC CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT

CONTRACTS-COMPETITION-CONSUMER

GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS

CORNELL LAW REVIEW

D.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

PROCUREMENT LAW

COMPANY LAW

CRIMINAL LAW

E.

(LES) ECHOS/ ISSUES LES ECHOS

ECONOMIC INTUITION

(THE) ECONOMIST

EMORY LAW JOURNAL

EUROPE

(THE) EUROPEAN ANTITRUST REVIEW

EUROPEAN COMPETITION JOURNAL

EUROPEAN COMPETITION LAW REVIEW

EUROPEAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERY REVIEW

EUROPEAN LAW REPORTER

EUROPEAN LAW REVIEW

EUROPEAN VOICE

F.

FAIR TRADING

FORDHAM LAW REVIEW

G.

(THE) PALACE GAZETTE

GLOBAL ANTITRUST WEEKLY

GLOBAL COMPETITION REVIEW

H.

HARVARD LAW REVIEW

I.

INSTITUTE ANTITRUST LAW AND POLICY FORDHAM CLI

INTERNAT. COMPANY AND COMMERCIAL LAW REVIEW

INTERNAT. ENERGY LAW AND TAXATION REVIEW

INTERNAT. JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION

INTERNAT. TRADE LAW AND REGULATION

J.

COURT JOURNAL. EUROPEAN LAW

INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL CLUNET

JOURNAL OF INTERNAT. BANKING LAW AND REGULATION

JOURNAL OF COMPETITION LAW AND ECONOMICS

JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LITERATURE

JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES

JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS

JOURNAL OF LAW AND ECONOMICS

JOURNAL OF LAW ECONOMICS & ORGANIZATION

JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES

JOURNAL OF REGULATORY ECONOMICS

K.

L.

ECONOMIC LAW

LAMY PUBLIC BUSINESS LAW

M.

(THE) MONITOR (OF PUBLIC WORKS AND BUILDING)

N.

NORTHWESTERN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND BUSINESS

O.

OREGON LAW REVIEW

P.

(THE) SMALL POSTERS

ECONOMIC PROBLEMS

PROCEDURES

INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY

Q.

R.

RAND JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS

DALLOZ COLLECTION

REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS

JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY

JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LAW

CASE LAW REVIEW

CASE LAW REVIEW OF BUSINESS LAW

OECD REVIEW ON COMPETITION LAW AND POLICY

COMPETITION AND CONSUMER REVIEW

ENERGY REVIEW

LEGAL RESEARCH JOURNAL - PROSPECTIVE LAW

EUROPEAN BUSINESS REVIEW

CONTRACT REVIEW

REVIEW OF COLLECTIVE PROCEDURES

PUBLIC LAW REVIEW

REVIEW OF THE COMMON MARKET AND THE EUROPEAN UNION

EUROPEAN UNION LAW REVIEW

(THE) ECONOMIC JOURNAL

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL JOURNAL

FRENCH ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JOURNAL

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE LAW

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC LAW.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPETITION

PUBLIC ENTERPRISE LAW REVIEW

LAMY COMPETITION REVIEW

LAMY DROIT DE L’IMMATERIEL MAGAZINE

LAMY BUSINESS LAW REVIEW

QUARTERLY CIVIL LAW REVIEW

QUARTERLY REVIEW OF COMMERCIAL AND ECONOMIC LAW

QUARTERLY REVIEW OF EUROPEAN LAW

S.

LEGAL WEEK - COMPANY EDITION

LEGAL WEEK - GENERAL EDITION

T.

TEXAS INTERNATIONAL LAW REVIEW

TULANE LAW REVIEW

U.

(THE) NEW PLANT

V.

W.

WORLD COMPETITION

X.

Y.

YALE LAW JOURNAL

YALE JOURNAL OF INTERNAT. LAW

Z.

PDF Version

Authors

Quotation

Umberto Berkani, Alain Ronzano, Christelle Adjémian, Competition journals: July - Oct. 2007, December 2007, Concurrences N° 4-2007, Art. N° 14732, pp. 187 - 192

Visites 8371

All reviews