TITLE

January—February 2013

AUTHOR(S)
Buendía, José Luis; Givaja, Angel
PUB. DATE
June 2013
SOURCE
Journal of European Competition Law & Practice;Jun2013, Vol. 4 Issue 3, p285
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
This article summarizes the main cases and developments in the field of EU competition law in the months of January and February 2013
ACCESSION #
87988207

 

Related Articles

  • Compliance Costs–Breaking Seals in European Commission Investigations. Rab, Suzanne // Journal of European Competition Law & Practice;Apr2013, Vol. 4 Issue 2, p139 

    The Court of Justice of the EU has dismissed an appeal against a European Commission decision fining E.ON €38 million for breaking a seal during an EU competition inspection.

  • AcÅ£iunile întreprinse de Comisia Europeană pentru asigurarea respectării Cartei drepturilor fundamentale de către statele membre. FUEREA, Augustin // Revista Româna de Drept European;2013 Supplement, p107 

    The Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, guarantees the Chart being observed. Therefore, the Commission is the one which intervenes, whenever necessary, to compel states to comply with the Chart. In 2012, the Commission brought before the Court of Justice, for the first time, cases of...

  • BEHAVIORAL ANTITRUST AND MONOPOLIZATION. Stucke, Maurice E. // Journal of Competition Law & Economics;Sep2012, Vol. 8 Issue 3, p545 

    One hot topic is whether Google has violated the antitrust laws. Another important topic is how behavioral economics can enrich antitrust policy. This article examines two implications of behavioral economics on antitrust monopolization law. The article first discusses trial-and-error learning...

  • FAIR AND EFFECTIVE COMPETITION POLICY IN THE EU: WHICH ROLE FOR AUTHORITIES AND WHICH ROLE FOR THE COURTS AFTER MENARINI? BRONCKERS, MARCO; VALLERY, ANNE // European Competition Journal;Aug2012, Vol. 8 Issue 2, p283 

    The article discusses various aspects of the amendments made by European Commission in European Union competition law. It highlights the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in various cases involving competition laws. It further questions the compatibility and principles...

  • COMMITMENT DECISIONS IN EU COMPETITION LAW. Dunne, Niamh // Journal of Competition Law & Economics;Jun2014, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p399 

    Introduced into EU competition law by Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003, commitment decisions provide a settlement mechanism for Commission enforcement actions based upon concessions offered by defendant undertakings. The use of negotiated settlements is closely linked with the shift toward a more...

  • Due Process in EU Competition Cases Following the Introduction of the New Best Practices Guidelines on Antitrust Proceedings. MacGregor, Anne; Gecic, Bogdan // Journal of European Competition Law & Practice;Oct2012, Vol. 3 Issue 5, p425 

    Commission decisions have unprecedented legal and practical effects that require stringent procedural safeguards in order to satisfy due process.The current state of EU judicial review is as yet insufficient to counterbalance the far-reaching impact of Commission decisions.The Commission's...

  • Post Danmark: The CJEU Calls for an Effect-Based Assessment of Pricing Policies. Barazza, Stefano // Journal of European Competition Law & Practice;Oct2012, Vol. 3 Issue 5, p466 

    In Post Danmark, the Court of Justice of the EU clarifies that price discrimination cannot, of itself, constitute an exclusionary abuse, and endorses an effect-based approach to Article 82 EC (Art. 102 TFEU), centred upon the ‘as efficient competitor’ test.

  • AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE SINGLE ECONOMIC ENTITY DOCTRINE IN EU COMPETITION LAW. Koenig, Carsten // Journal of Competition Law & Economics;Jun2017, Vol. 13 Issue 2, p281 

    According to well-established case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), in the European Union (EU), parent companies can be fined for antitrust infringements by their subsidiaries. Furthermore, under a new EU Directive, signed into law on November 26, 2014, parent company liability is...

  • Judge in Microsoft case confuses competitors and competition. Sowell // Enterprise/Salt Lake City;11/15/99, Vol. 29 Issue 21, p26 

    Focuses on the ruling in the antitrust case against Microsoft Corp. Specific laws that the company violated; Definition of monopoly.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics