Business executives like to stress the impersonality of their work. If things go wrong, then, sure, there are commercial consequences but that’s usually where it ends. Things have to be pretty gross before people start paying any serious attention to personal consequences – and very bad indeed before they recognise a genuine loss of integrity…
In its recent TeliaSonera judgment, the Court of Justice discusses whether a margin squeeze can only be abusive if the dominant company has a duty to supply the input at issue. The Court concludes that a duty to supply is not needed. The judgment, however, does not offer a clear definition of the scope for…
The case concerns the question under which conditions the possible future creation of potential competition can be considered to strengthen a dominant position under German merger control rules (see decision of December 22, 2010, VI-Kart 4/09 (V)). The FCO had prohibited a merger between two local publishers that were active in separate, but neighboring geographic…
To commemorate his first year in office as Competition Commissioner, Mr. Almunia and José openly discuss current and future competition policy issues.The full interview for World Competition is posted in Mr Almunia’s webpage http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/almunia/index_fr.htm Amongst the varied topics covered in this interview the following are worth highlighting: Fines and Damages for Competition law infringements; the…
The European Commission’s Phase II decision of 17 November 2010 concerning Syngenta’s acquisition of Monsanto’s sunflower seeds business raises a number of questions. First, it took the European authorities long to decide who should review the case. The transaction was signed in August 2009 – it did not have an EU dimension and was notifiable…
Lawyers do funny things to words. Sometimes, of course, they need to create a technical term to cover something that doesn’t exist in ordinary parlance. “Tort” is an obvious example. Yes, you can talk about a civil wrong that has no element of contract to it but that’s a longwinded way of expressing yourself. Most…
From December 2010 to February 2011, the FCO investigated a planned settlement between the parties to a tender dispute in the public transport sector. The FCO suspected that the planned settlement would infringe the cartel prohibition (“buying competition”). The FCO issued a case report on February 25, 2011. The case illustrates that the FCO, which…
Consumer belief in all regulation and its efficacy has taken such an enormous battering following the banking crisis that regulators have to look more like policemen and less like flunkeys if they want to be taken seriously.
In her recent Opinion in the KME case, AG Sharpston ventured a few considerations on the nature of EU antitrust decisions and on the due process requirements arising from Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) on the right to a fair trial, to be added to a growing list of signals perceptible in recent judgments of a progressive move toward a broader interpretation of the EU Courts unlimited jurisdiction and, possibly, the exercise of full appellate jurisdiction over Commission decisions imposing fines.
The German Federal Cartel Office (“FCO”) fined three manufacturers of fire-fighting vehicles on February 10, 2011, imposing € 20.5 million in total. The FCO found that the companies had engaged in bid rigging since 2001 (price-fixing, quota agreements and market sharing). As usual, the FCO did not only fine the companies, but also the individuals…
