Competition journals: June - Oct. 2008

1. General - Scope of application

The networking of regulatory authorities, L. IDOT (RDP 2008, n° 3, p. 787-821)

In this feature article, Laurence Idot addresses the highly topical issue of the networking of sector-specific regulatory authorities at Community level, based on the model of the successful networking of competition authorities under the major reform brought about by Regulation 1/2003 on the implementation of Articles 81 and 82 EC, which provided the most comprehensive and complete model for networking of national authorities around the Commission, with the baptismal funds of the European Competition Network. The difficulties the Commission is encountering in acculturating this model to the regulation of network industries, whether electronic communications or the energy sector, are well known. But before examining in the second part of his paper the obstacles to adapting the ECN model, not only for the regulation of network industries, but also for the regulation of the other branches of competition law - mergers and state aid - the author takes the opportunity to take stock of the ECN in a first part entitled "The undeniable success of the European Competition Network". And it is true that the networking of national competition authorities at European level has profoundly changed the way in which Community competition law is applied. As the author points out, the system of Regulation No 1/2003 refers more to deconcentration than to decentralisation. In practice, however, the deconcentration intended by the Regulation has turned into a genuine de facto decentralisation. While the Commission, as head of the network, continues to ensure the coherence of the system, there is undoubtedly a new distribution of roles: the Commission’s activity now boils down to the repression of cartels alone, in addition to the conduct of sectoral investigations, with the result that the application of Articles 81 and 82 is now carried out at national level by the national competition authorities. This new responsibility leads to another way of constructing Community law: in addition to the convergence of the substantive rules through an alignment of national rules on Articles 81 and 82 EC, but also through the creation of Community law by the national competition authorities each time they are faced with new problems, there is also a convergence of procedural rules, especially through the development of negotiated solutions or alternatives to sanctions (leniency, commitment or settlement). To be read urgently...

La création d’une Autorité de la concurrence aux compétences élardies : une réforme majeure et quelques scories, M. DEBROUX (Contrats, conc., consom., juil. 2008, Focus, comm. 45, p. 4)

Are you looking for a succinct and clear presentation of the issues at stake in the LME? Look no further! In this one-sheet paper, Michel Debroux provides you with everything you need to know about the prerogatives and limits of the new Competition Authority, before the publication of the ordinance and implementing decrees that are due to complete the system before the end of autumn 2008. We particularly appreciate the author’s measured reservations about the disappearance of the "second look" mechanism for merger control and the establishment of a "mono-look", which will certainly lead to an impoverishment of the analysis, since it is not always obvious to be right on one’s own. One appreciates even more the author’s renewed reservations regarding the Minister’s new prerogatives in the repression of local anti-competitive practices (or micro-CAPs) that carry the seeds of a considerable risk for SMEs, that of being forced to accept a transaction even though the anti-competitive nature of the practices they are accused of is questionable or, even worse, would not have been retained if the matter had been referred to the Competition Authority.

See also:

Sur une autorité de concurrence moderne ?, J.-L. FOURGOUX (RJ Com. 2008/4, p. 251); Une autorité de la concurrence pas si puissante que cela, J.-P. DE LA LAURENCIE and J.-P. TRAN THIET (Les Echos, 23 Sept. 2008, p. 19), as well as the interview with T. DAHAN, rapporteur-general of the Conseil de la concurrence (INC Hebdo, 15-21 Sept. 2008, n° 1487, p. 2)

Loi de modernisation de l’économie: une nouvelle réforme du droit de la concurrence, P. ARHEL (Petites affiches, 7 August 2008, No. 158, p. 3)

See also:

Loi de modernisation de l’économie: mesures en droit de la concurrence, (BRDA 17/08, 15 Sept. 2008, n° 20, p. 10); La réforme des pratiques commerciales (Loi n° 2008-776 du 4 août 2008), D. FERRIER et D. FERRE (D. 2008, Études, p. 2234)

Competition litigation, archetypal of the harmonization process? The development in Europe of negotiated solutions: commitments, leniency, non-contestation of grievances - What will be left to the judge? (Proceedings of the colloquium organised by CREDA on 4 December 2007 in Paris on the theme "For an efficient economic justice in Europe") (Gas. Pal, n° 233-234, August 20 to 20, 2008, p. 1-63 and n° 235-239, August 22 to 22, 2008, p. 1-62)

Starting from the idea that competition litigation could constitute the archetype of the process of harmonization of Community litigation, the organizers of this event decided to dedicate two out of four round tables to the contributions of competition law. The first round table was devoted to "The application of Community antitrust law by national courts". Jacqueline Riffault-Silk, Christopher Bellamy and Enrico Adriano Raffaelli discussed the obstacles to the application of Community antitrust law by the national courts, which is marked by the low number of actions brought before the courts. This observation led them to discuss ways of improving the implementation of private actions in the context of the reflections underway following the European Commission’s Green and White Papers on private enforcement. The second round table dedicated to competition law was entitled "The development in Europe of negotiated solutions: commitments, leniency, non-contestation of grievances - What will be left to the judge" and was attended by Denis Waelbroeck, Hubert Legal and Claude Lazarus. They look at the implementation of these negotiated procedures, the leniency procedure in particular following the Alrosa judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities, but also at the latest negotiated procedure, the recent direct settlement procedure introduced by the Commission in its toolbox, with a particularly incisive, if not downright critical, look.

Market definition and unilateral competitive effects in online retail market, M. R. BAYE (Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Sept. 2008, Vol. 4, Issue 3, p. 639).

Several articles in this issue of the Journal of Competition Law and Economics deal with sensitive issues related to the application of competition rules to the Internet, including the delineation of relevant markets and competitive analysis of Internet activities. One of these, by Michael R. Baye, addresses the competitive assessment of retail Internet markets in general, both as regards relevant markets and as regards competitive effects, and warns against the biases that may result from not taking into account certain aspects of Internet markets. Another article, Are "online markets" real and relevant? From the Monster-Hotjobs merger to the Google-Doubleclick merger, B. ABRAMSON (p. 655), discusses the issue of the delineation of Internet markets as distinct from traditional markets and possible differences in competitive analysis. To this end, he studies two emblematic merger control cases, Monster-Hotjobs in 2001 and Google-Doubleclick in 2007, and finds, on the one hand, that the convergence of analysis increases as the novelty of the Internet decreases and, on the other hand, that the most interesting issues in these cases are not necessarily competitive .

The parallels between the Harvard Structural School and Article 82 EC and the divergences between Chicago and Post-Chicago Schools and Article 82 EC, L. LOVDAHL GORMSEN (European Competition Journal, June 2008, Vol. 4, Issue 1, p. 221)

Les professions réglementées entre club et qualité, J.-B. AUBY (O.D. No. 8-9, August-Sept. 2008, p. 1)

Les professions réglementées, A. PERRIN (D. adm. n° 8-9, August-September 2008, p. 10)

Le Rapport de la Commission pour la libération de la croissance française (Attali Commission) : réglementations économiques, réforme de L’État et droit administratif, J. DE CLAUSADE (D. adm. n° 8-9, August-Sept. 2008, p. 8)

Activity of the Community courts in competition law (April 2008), P. ARHEL (Petites affiches, 7 Jul. 2008, No 135, p. 20)

Activity of the Community courts in competition law (May to August 2008), P. ARHEL (Petites affiches, 8 Sept. 2008, No 180, p. 6)

Activity of the Cour de cassation and the Conseil d’État in competition law (January to April 2008), P. ARHEL (Petites affiches, 29 August 2008, No. 174, p. 3)

Chronique Concurrence, L. IDOT (Europe, July 2008, comm. 237-248, p. 17; August-September 2008, comm. 272-279).

Chronique Droit de la Concurrence, L. IDOT ET C. PRIETO (DRC Apr.2008, p. 331)

Chronique Concurrence - Articles 81 and 82 EC (1 July 2006 - 31 December 2007), L. IDOT ET J.-B. BLAISE (RTD eur., Apr.-June 2008, p. 313-403)

Chronique Concurrence, M. BAZEX G. DECOCQ, M. MALAURIE-VIGNAL AND D. BOSCO (Contracts, conc., consom., July 2008, comm. 180 to 186, p. 28; August-September 2008, comm. 202 to 213, p. 20)

Chronique de droit économique, C. ANADON (RLDA July-August 2008, No. 1737 to 1743, p. 47; Sept. 2008, No. 1808 to 1810, p. 50)

Chronique Concurrence (RJDA, Jul. 2008, p. 831; Aug.-Sep. 2008, p. 917; Oct. 2008, p. 1025)

Chronique Concurrence-Distribution (January 2007-December 2007), D. FERRIER (D. 2008, Studies, p. 2193)

Chronique annuelle 2007 de jurisprudence communautaire, F. DONNAT (RJEP, n° 655, Jul. 2008, p. 9)

Chronique de jurisprudence communautaire, E. BROUSSY, F. DONNAT ET C. LAMBERT (AJDA, 4 August 2008, Studies, p. 1533)

2. Agreements

2.1. General

Resale price maintenance and its alleged efficiencies, L. PEEPERKORN (European Competition Journal, June 2008, Vol. 4, Issue 1, p. 201)

The Leegin judgment is a source of discussion on the issue of minimum prices which is not about to dry up and which is particularly relevant in Europe in the light of the forthcoming expiry in May 2010 of the current block exemption regulation on vertical restraints, Regulation 2790/99. This article is part of that reflection. The author, who works at the Commission but speaks on his own behalf, first of all recalls the consequences in Community law of the inclusion of minimum prices imposed in an agreement, the differences between the European notion of hardcore restrictions and the American notion of practices per se and their respective consequences. It then suggests that the use of the concept of hardcore restrictions is to some extent consistent with the principles laid down in the Leegin judgment and that that judgment in fact opens up the possibility for US courts to apply European practice. It then examines the main economic arguments on the negative effects (facilitating collusion, limiting price cuts, reducing pressure on the producer’s margin and limiting dynamism and innovation at the distribution level) and the positive effects (possible increase in advertising, intensification of inter-brand competition, limiting free riding problems, maintaining stocks and aiding entry into new markets). On these issues, the author, who incidentally works at the Commission, considers at this stage that the positive effects are not very significant and that the minimum prices imposed are not efficient instruments to achieve these effects. Nevertheless, and in conclusion, the author points out that the reflection on the next exemption regulation has only just begun and that the debate is open.

The single complex and continuous infringement - "Effect" Utilitarianism, K. SEIFERT (ECLR, Sept. 2008, Vol. 29, Issue 9, p. 546)

The author presents in this article the origin and development of the complex and continuous single infringement concept in EC competition law for horizontal cartels, including its extension to increasingly diverse situations and its use for infringements in several markets. In this respect, it considers that the Commission has gone too far and makes a critical analysis of the decision-making practice, in particular the most recent one. It points out the disadvantages of this concept for cartel members in terms of fines, defence, leniency and possible actions for damages. It also sets out the legal issues it raises, as regards its legal basis, the presumption of innocence and the necessary link between an infringement of Article 81 and a specific market.

See also :

L’entente complexe et continue : genèse et perspective d’une notion récemment accueillie par le droit français, T. OSTER (RLC, 2008/16, No. 1179, p. 110)

Sense and nonsense of rules on proof in cartel cases: how to reconcile a more economics-based approach to competition law with more attention for rules on proof, L. PARRET (European Competition Journal, June 2008, Vol. 4, Issue 1, p. 169).

Agreement: competition of wills, or offer and acceptance, O. BLACK (European Competition Journal, June 2008, Vol. 4, Issue 1, p. 103).

Boundaries between Unilateral and Multilateral Conducts in Vertical Restraints, B. J. MCCABE (ECLR, Oct. 2008, Vol. 29, Issue 10, p. 600).

The fruit and vegetable sector at European time (Competition & consumption, No. 160, July-August-September 2008, p. 2)

Doulamis" Judgment, Mr P. NEGRINOTTI (RDUE, 2/2008, Jurisp., p. 359)

2.2. Distribution

Marketing via the Internet outside the network is lawful, but (note ss. TGI Strasbourg, ord., 8 Jan. 2008, Puma France), M. CHAGNY (Comm. com. électr., Apr. 2008, n° 55, p. 32)

Chronique Droit de la distribution, S. LEBRETON-DERRIEN (RJ Com. 2008/4, p. 290)

Chronique Droit de la distribution, D. MAINGUY, J.-L. RESPAUD ET S. DESTOURS (JCP ed. E, 0)

Chronique Distribution, M. MALAURIE-VIGNAL ET N. MATHEY (Contracts, conc., consom., Jul. 2008, comm. 176 to 179, p. 25; Aug.-Sep. 2008, comm. 197 to 200, p. 17)

3. Abuse of dominance

Microsoft : suite sans fin, M. CHAGNY (Comm. com. électr., May 2008, n° 67, p. 30)

See also :

Microsoft v Commission and the interoperability issue, S. ANDERMAN (EIPR, 2008, Vol. 30, Issue 10, p. 395).

Unilateral conduct in an oligopoly according to the discussion paper on art. 82: conscious parallelism or abuse of collective dominance, T. VECCHI (World Competition, Sept. 2008, Vol. 31, Issue 3, p. 385).

Excessive prices, unfair prices and economic value: the law of excessive pricing under article 82 EC and the chapter II prohibition, M. FURSE (European Competition Journal, June 2008, Vol. 4, Issue 1, p. 59).

Very high-speed Internet: no to provisional measures, but the investigation is continuing (note ss. Cons. conc. 12 Feb. 2008), M. CHAGNY (Comm. com. electr., May 2008, No. 68, p. 31)

4. Restrictive practices

La rupture d’une relation commerciale établie, M. BEHAR-TOUCHAIS (Petites affiches, 9 Oct. 2008, No. 203, p. 9)

Tariff transparency, legislative opacity - Reflections on the impotence of the law, L.-M. AUGAGNEUR (RTD com., Apr-June 2008, p. 221)

La résurrection de l’article L. 442-6, III, du Code de commerce (obs. ss. Cass. com. 8 Jul. 2008, Centres Leclerc), É. CHEVRIER (D. 2008, Actualité jurisprudentielle, p. 2067)

5. Concentrations

Concentrations and national champions: new on Article 21 of the Merger Regulation, A. WINCKLER (RLC, 2008/16, No 1124, p. 9)

See also :

Protectionist threats against cross-border mergers: unexplored avenues to strengthen the effectiveness of article 21 ECMR, D. GERARD (CMLR, August 2008, Vol. 45, Issue 4, p. 987) and "National Champions" rhetoric in European Law - Or the many faces of protectionism, A. GOUCHA SOARES (World Competition, Sept. 2008, Vol. 31, Issue 3, p. 353)

Commission v. Spain" judgment, J. FIGUS-DIAZ (RDUE, 2/2008, Jurisp., p. 366)

See also :

Application of Article 21 of the Merger Regulation in the E.ON/Endesa case, L. BUSA & E. ZAERA CUADRADO (Competition Policy Newsletter 2008, number 2, p. 1)

The application of the Merger Control Regulation (1 January 2006 - 31 December 2007), J.-F. BELLIS AND C. NASSOGNE (JTDE, Sept. 2008, No. 151, p. 211)

Strategic incentives under vertical integration: the case of wireline-affiliated wireless carriers and intermodal competition in the US, P. ZIMMERMAN (Journal of Regulatory Economics, 2008, Vol. 34, Issue 3, p. 282).

6. State aid

Centre d’exportation du livre français (CELF)" judgment, R.K. WAGNER (RDUE, 2/2008, Jurisp., p. 351).

State aid issues in the privatisation of public undertakings - Some recent decisions, L. VON BUTTLAR, Z. WAGNER & S. MEDGHOUL (Competition Policy Newsletter 2008, number 2, p. 77)

Helping to combat climate change: new State aid guidelines for environmental protection, A. WINTERSTEIN & B. TRANHOLM SCHWARZ (Competition Policy Newsletter 2008, number 2, p. 12)

7. Public sector and competition

Social law, competition law and administrative judge, A. ANTOINE (AJDA, 22 Sept. 2008, Studies, p. 1689)

Commenting on the decision of the Council of State of 21 May 2008 (Société nouvelle de remorquage du Havre), the author regrets that the High Court rejected competition law considerations in favour of social law considerations. The case concerned an appeal against an order extending the provisions of a collective agreement to the port towage sector, which had just been opened up to competition. The application of such an agreement was expected to result in significant additional costs for new entrants as compared with the operators already in place. However, the Council of State did not consider that there was a disproportionate interference with free competition between port towage operators.

Can infringements of competition between candidates for a public contract be invoked against the decision to award the contract? (note CAA Marseille 3 déc. 2007, Société Urbaco), J.-D. DREYFUS (AJDA, 14 Jul. 2008, Actualité jurisprudentielle, p. 1388)

Actualité du droit de la concurrence et de la régulation, L. RICHER, P.-A. JEANNENEY ET S. NICINSKI (AJDA, 16 June 2008, Studies, p. 1129)

Competition Law and Institutional Scheme, J.-B. AUBY (O.D. No. 7, Jul. 2008, p. 1)

PMU and freedom to provide services, M. BAZEX ET S. BLAZY (D. adm. n° 7, Jul. 2008, p. 31)

Les apports du traité de Lisbonne au service public, F. CHALTIEL (AJDA, 8 Sept. 2008, Studies, p. 1575)

Chronique Concurrence : interventions économiques des personnes publiques, M. BAZEX, F. ROLIN ET P. SUBRA DE BIEUSSES (Contracts, conc., consom., Jul. 2008, comm. 1 to 7, p. 16)

8. Procedures

8.1. General

Actions for damages for breach of antitrust rules and abuse of a dominant position (in connection with the judgments of the Conseil d’État of 19 December 2007, Société Campenon-Bernard, and of 19 March 2008, SA Dumez and others). Return to the question of the relationship between fraud and anti-competitive practices in public business contracts, S. BRACONNIER ET N. BOULOUIS (RDP, 4-2008, p. 1160).

Stéphane Braconnier comes back to the famous affair known as the TGV Nord, but in its administrative aspect. The SNCF had initiated an action against the companies that were members of the cartel, on the grounds that the cartel constituted fraudulent manoeuvres that necessarily vitiated its consent, this defect resulting in the obligation for the cartelists to compensate him. The author criticizes the treatment of the question of the jurisdiction of the administrative courts by the Conseil d’État in this type of litigation but, above all, expresses doubts as to the automatic link made between the anti-competitive practice and the fraud in order to establish the event giving rise to the damage; this automaticity tends to underestimate the conduct played by the victim, as in this case the SNCF, which had apparently been alerted to the anti-competitive practices. It should be noted in this regard that the DGCCRF also considers that the existence of fraud is sufficient to characterise the existence of a fault likely to engage the liability of an undertaking but, according to the author, the fact of deceiving the public purchaser as to the reality of competition is not sufficient to characterise fraud.

The E.ON seals case - 38 million fine for tampering with Commission seals, O. KOCH ET D. SCHNICHELS (Competition Policy Newsletter 2008, number 2, p. 21)

The detailed facts and the legal analysis followed by the Commission in this first case of a penalty for breach of seals in the context of a Community inspection are explained here. In particular, the Commission sets out the investigations which it carried out in order to determine whether the seal could have been broken unintentionally, but comes to the conclusion that it could only have been a voluntary action by a member of E.ON to break the seal on the door giving access to a room containing documents which the Commission’s investigators had not yet examined. In determining the amount of the fine, which could be as high as 1 % of the turnover of the undertaking concerned, in the absence of any guidelines on the matter, the Commission took into account the gravity of the practice, its duration and the general principles of non-discrimination and proportionality in setting fines. However, the Commission has made clear that subsequent sanctions in this area will be much more severe, as companies are now warned of the risks involved in such practices.

Les programmes de conformité : l’heure du doute, P. LOMBART (RJEP, n° 656, August-September 2008, p. 2)

Patrice Lombart explains the reasons for the craze for competition law compliance programs on the part of businesses, but above all the ambiguity and then the doubt that these programs raise in light of the way they are taken into account by competition authorities today.

La preuve déloyale en matière de pratiques anticoncurrentielles (note ss. Cass. com. 3 June 2008, Sony France), G. ROYER (JCP éd. E, 4 Sept. 2008, n° 36, 2055, p. 27)

See also:

Competition litigation: the need to respect the principle of loyalty (note ss. Cass. com. 3 June 2008, Sony France), M.-E. BOURSIER-MAUDERLY (D 2008, No. 35, Études, p. 2476) and Loyalty of proof of anti-competitive practices (Report by VALERIE MICHEL-AMSELLEM) (RJDA, 8-9/08, p. 917)

Between the no to Europe and the great political project, the advances of Europe in small steps: the White Paper on private actions in competition law, S. POILLOT-PERUZZETTO (RLDA July-August 2008, editorial, p. 2)

See also:

The White Paper on Damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules, P. MATTERA (RDUE, 2/2008, Brèves, p. 348); A long-awaited White Paper (Competition & Consumer Affairs, No. 160, July-July 2008); The White Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules, P. MATTERA (RDUE, 2/2008, Brèves, p. 348)August-Sept. 2008, p. 21); The White Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules, R. BECKER, NICOLAS BESSOT & EDDY DE SMIJTER (Competition Policy Newsletter 2008, number 2, p. 4)

La place des tiers dans le référé communautaire en matière de concurrence, É. BARBIER DE LA SERRE (RLC, 2008/16, n° 1161, p. 56)

Les bornes de la célérité en droit processuel de la concurrence, R. DUMAS (RRJ, 2008/2, p. 979).

Are monetary incentives enough to boost actions for damages in the European Union? On the relevance of incompleteness of laws and evidentiary requirements, A. MARRA & A. MARRA. SARRA (World Competition, Sept. 2008, Vol. 31, Issue 3, p. 369)

Pitfalls of the european competition network - Why better protection of leniency applicants and legal regulation of case allocation is needed, A. SCHWAB & C. STEINLE (ECLR, Sept. 2008, Vol. 29, Issue 9, p. 546)

Expert evidence before the EC courts, E. BARBIER DE LA SERRE & A-L. SIBONY (CMLR, August 2008, Vol. 45, Issue 4, p. 941)

Violation of fair trial by French law on tax searches, J.-P. MAUBLANC (RMCUE, No. 520, July-August 2008, p. 470)

8.2. Sanction Policy - Clemency - Settlement - Undertakings

The use of settlements in public antitrust enforcement: objectives and principles, P. J. W. WOUTER (World Competition, Sept. 2008, Vol. 31, Issue 3, p. 335).

This Article examines with great clarity, within the Community framework of the commitment procedure provided for in Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003 and the Commission’s settlement procedure, two issues which are essential to the proper functioning of such proceedings: their contribution to the effectiveness of the enforcement of competition law and their compatibility with the fundamental rights of defence.

Adoption by the European Commission of a "settlement" procedure in cartel matters, V. LEDOUX ET J.-C. RODA (Contrats, conc., consom., August-Sept. 2008, Study, 10, p. 8)

See also:

La Commission européenne se doter d’un système de transaction, P. ARHEL (JCP éd. E, 10 Jul. 2008, n° 28-29, 352, p. 3)

Les pouvoirs de la Commission européenne dans la procédure d’engagement (TPICE 11 juillet 2007, aff. T-170/06, Alrosa Compagny), Chronique de droit communautaire de la concurrence, G. DECOCQ (RJ Com. 2008/4, p. 285)

9. Regulations

The fallacies of network neutrality regulation, G. KNIEPS & P. ZENHAÜSERN (CRNI, June 2008, Vol. 9, Issue 2, p. 119)

In this article, the authors consider that the regulatory principle of "network neutrality" (i.e. the principle that, in substance, data networks should give equal priority to all transmissions, without discrimination) is not necessary as long as monopolies on local loops are regulated. Above all, they denounce the counter-productivity of this principle and explain that it is contrary to an economic allocation of capacity, preventing congestion management (in particular through price) and differentiation of traffic quality.

See also :

Neutral Networks: The paradox of unbundling in the European regulation of energy and telecommunications, F. M. SALERNO (ECLR, August 2008, Vol. 29, Issue 8, p. 471).

Self-regulation and administrative law, J.-B. AUBY (D. Adm. No. 8-9, August-Sept. 2008, p. 23)

Revolution or evolution in telecoms? Sub-national markets in sector-specific regulation when competition develops unevenly, O. BRINGER & K. SCHUMM (Competition Policy Newsletter 2008, number 2, p. 25)

Cross-subsidies in the electricity sector, B. WILLEMS & E. EHLERS (CRNI, Sept. 2008, Vol. 9, Issue 3, p. 201)

10. International policy

Chronique politiques de concurrence, N. JALABERT-DOURY, L. NOUVEL, D. LE MAREC, P. LE MORE ET A. TERCINET (RDAI/IBLJ, 4/2008, p. 523)

This column is devoted to the analysis of international competition law news. As usual, issue 4/2008 covers the latest developments in EU and national competition law, as well as international developments in the field. At the Community level, it deals in particular with the important judgment of the ECHR Ravon v. France of 21 February 2008. It also includes a presentation of the white paper on private enforcement and a commentary on the CFI order of 8 March 2008 concerning the Aer Lingus and Ryanair merger. An item is also devoted to the latest national news with the House of Lords decision of 12 March 2008 concerning the extradition of Ian Norris, the publication by the German competition authority of four models for remedies in merger law and the French proposals in the report of the Coulon Commission. At the international level, the column comments on the bill to introduce criminal sanctions in Australia and the revision of merger thresholds by the United States. All these comments and many others are available online on the journal’s website at the following page: http://www.iblj.com/fr-0-10/afarticle-1/42008523-544/politiques_de_concurrence.html#.

Chronicle of competition policies, L. NOUVEL, D. LE MAREC, P. LE MORE AND A. TERCINET (RDAI/IBLJ, 3/2008, p. 365)

The development of competition rules in the Euro-Mediterranean partnership (1995-2008) (Competition & Consumer Affairs, No. 160, July-August-Sept. 2008, p. 24).

---

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

JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL SCIENCE AND COMPARATIVE 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.