论欧盟委员会救济实践的一致性

Benjamin Lörtscher, F. Maier-Rigaud
{"title":"论欧盟委员会救济实践的一致性","authors":"Benjamin Lörtscher, F. Maier-Rigaud","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3450614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Commission’s remedial practice displays important differences in the type of remedies accepted in merger versus antitrust cases. This paper provides a review of the Commission’s remedies practice over the last 14 years highlighting the differences and discussing inconsistencies. In particular, it raises the question why predominantly behavioural remedies are chosen in antitrust cases and how this practice is in line with the approach in merger control where the risks to effective competition are viewed as deriving from changes in the structure of the market and where therefore structural remedies are typically considered necessary.","PeriodicalId":401648,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law: EU eJournal","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Consistency of the European Commission’s Remedies Practice\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Lörtscher, F. Maier-Rigaud\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3450614\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The European Commission’s remedial practice displays important differences in the type of remedies accepted in merger versus antitrust cases. This paper provides a review of the Commission’s remedies practice over the last 14 years highlighting the differences and discussing inconsistencies. In particular, it raises the question why predominantly behavioural remedies are chosen in antitrust cases and how this practice is in line with the approach in merger control where the risks to effective competition are viewed as deriving from changes in the structure of the market and where therefore structural remedies are typically considered necessary.\",\"PeriodicalId\":401648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Public Law: EU eJournal\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Public Law: EU eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3450614\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law: EU eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3450614","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

欧盟委员会的补救做法显示出在并购与反垄断案件中所接受的补救类型的重要差异。本文回顾了欧盟委员会过去14年的救济做法,突出了差异并讨论了不一致之处。特别是,它提出了一个问题,即为什么在反垄断案件中主要选择行为补救措施,以及这种做法如何符合合并控制中的做法,在合并控制中,对有效竞争的风险被视为源于市场结构的变化,因此通常认为有必要采取结构性补救措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the Consistency of the European Commission’s Remedies Practice
The European Commission’s remedial practice displays important differences in the type of remedies accepted in merger versus antitrust cases. This paper provides a review of the Commission’s remedies practice over the last 14 years highlighting the differences and discussing inconsistencies. In particular, it raises the question why predominantly behavioural remedies are chosen in antitrust cases and how this practice is in line with the approach in merger control where the risks to effective competition are viewed as deriving from changes in the structure of the market and where therefore structural remedies are typically considered necessary.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信