Struggling with Article 101(3) TFEU: Diverging Approaches of the Commission, EU Courts, and Five Competition Authorities

O. Brook
{"title":"Struggling with Article 101(3) TFEU: Diverging Approaches of the Commission, EU Courts, and Five Competition Authorities","authors":"O. Brook","doi":"10.54648/cola2019006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The decentralized enforcement regime of EU competition law is based on the assumption that the obligation to apply the same Treaty provisions is sufficient to ensure a uniform administration of the law. This paper questions this assumption. Based on a systematic analysis of a large database of cases, it presents empirical evidence indicating that the Commission, EU courts and five national competition authorities have followed very different interpretations of the law when applying Article 101(3)TFEU. The paper uses the debate over the types of benefit that can be examined under Article 101(3) TFEU as an illustrative example of the struggle between the different competition authorities in shaping the future of EU competition policy.","PeriodicalId":434487,"journal":{"name":"European Economics: Microeconomics & Industrial Organization eJournal","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Economics: Microeconomics & Industrial Organization eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2019006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

The decentralized enforcement regime of EU competition law is based on the assumption that the obligation to apply the same Treaty provisions is sufficient to ensure a uniform administration of the law. This paper questions this assumption. Based on a systematic analysis of a large database of cases, it presents empirical evidence indicating that the Commission, EU courts and five national competition authorities have followed very different interpretations of the law when applying Article 101(3)TFEU. The paper uses the debate over the types of benefit that can be examined under Article 101(3) TFEU as an illustrative example of the struggle between the different competition authorities in shaping the future of EU competition policy.
与TFEU第101(3)条的斗争:委员会、欧盟法院和五个竞争管理机构的不同方法
欧盟竞争法的分散执法制度是基于这样一种假设,即适用相同《条约》条款的义务足以确保法律的统一执行。本文对这一假设提出了质疑。基于对大型案例数据库的系统分析,本文提供了经验证据,表明欧盟委员会、欧盟法院和五个国家竞争管理机构在适用第101(3)条TFEU时遵循了非常不同的法律解释。本文使用了关于可以根据第101(3)条TFEU审查的利益类型的辩论,作为不同竞争当局在塑造欧盟竞争政策未来方面的斗争的一个说明性例子。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信