Extending the Principle of Economic Continuity to Private Enforcement of Competition Law. What Lies Ahead for Corporate Restructuring and Civil Damages Proceedings after Skanska? Case Comment to the Judgement of the Court of Justice of 14 March 2019 Skanska Industrial Solutions and others (Case C-724/17)

• Authors: Vasiliki Fasoula

Abstracts

FR

Dans la tradition des États membres de droit civil, les questions de responsabilité civile sont liées à la personne morale qui a causé un dommage, à l’exception du voile corporatif. L’autorité finlandaise de la concurrence a infligé des amendes aux entreprises finlandaises qui ont participé à une entente sur l’asphalte. Depuis cette décision, une action en dommages-intérêts a été introduite pour violation de l’article 101 du TFUE, qui a finalement abouti à l’arrêt Skanska. Le juge européen complète et précise certaines ambiguïtés de la directive Dommages et intérêts. D’un point de vue global de l’objectif poursuivi par l’application publique et privée des règles du droit européen de la concurrence, l’entité économique de l’ «entreprise» telle qu’elle est définie par le droit européen, et non l’entité juridique telle qu’elle est définie par le droit national, doit être un critère de fond, et non de procédure, dans les procédures en responsabilité civile devant les juridictions nationales qui accordent des indemnités pour violation du droit européen. L’introduction du principe de continuité économique dans les procedures nationales de responsabilité civile est une harmonisation progressive du droit civil national afin de servir l’efficacité du droit européen de la concurrence. Le champ d’application de Skanska pourrait également s’étendre aux infractions à l’article 102 du TFUE. La restructuration des entreprises doit dorénavant faire l’objet d’un contrôle préalable long et complexe, car les acquéreurs pourraient être fiables pour les infractions commises par leurs prédécesseurs dans tous les États membres.

EN

In the tradition of civil law Member States, civil liability issues are linked to the legal entity that caused a damage, with the exception of lifting the corporate veil. The Finnish competition authority imposed fines to Finnish companies that participated in an asphalt cartel. Following that decision, an action for damages was lodged for infringement of Article 101 TFEU that ultimately led to the Skanska ruling. The European judge completes and specifies some ambiguities of the Damages Directive. From a holistic point of view of the objective pursued by both public and private enforcement of European competition law rules, the economic entity of an ‘undertaking’, as it is defined by European law rather than the legal entity as it is defined by national law, must be a substantive criterion, and not a procedural one, in civil liability procedures before national courts awarding damages for European law infringements. Introducing the principle of economic continuity to national civil liability procedures is a creeping harmonisation of national civil law in order to serve the effectiveness of European competition law. The scope of Skanska could also extent to Article 102 TFEU infringements. Corporate restructuring must follow from now on a lengthy and complex due diligence as the acquirers could be liable for their predecessors’ infringements in any Member State.

Keywords

EN

actions for damages; determination of the entities liable to provide; compensation; principle of economic continuity; autonomous concept of; undertaking; effectiveness of EU competition law

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
• Journal: Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 12
• Issue: 20
• Pages: 259-268

Dates

published

2019

Contributors

author

Vasiliki Fasoula

• Panthéon-Assas University Paris II

References

• Cortese B. (2014). Piercing the Corporate Veil in EU Competition Law: The Parent Subsidiary Relationship and Antitrust Liability. In B. Cortese (ed.), EU Competition Law: Between Public and Private Enfrocement. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
• Hirsch G. (2008). Competition Law: European Community Practice and Procedure-Article by Article Commentary. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
• Iannuccelli P. (2014). The European Court of Justice and the Shaping of Private Enforcement of EU Antitrust Law through Preliminary Rulings. In B. Cortese (ed.), EU Competition Law: Between Public and Private Enforcement. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.
• Jones A. (2012). The boundaries of an undertaking in EU Competition Law. European Competition Journal, 8(2).
• Mercer H. (2013). Applicable Law in Cross-Border EU Competition Law Actions-Forum Shopping, Mandatory Rules and Public Policy, In M. Danov et alii (eds.), Cross-Border EU Competition Law Actions. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
• Monti G. (2018). Liability Issues not Codified by the Damages Directive: How to fil the gaps?. In P.-L. Parcu et alii (eds.), Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: The Impact of the Damages Directive. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Pardolesi R. (2012). Private Enforcement of Antitrust Law. In T. Eger, H-B. Schäfer, (eds.) Research Handbook on the Economics of European Union Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
• Pietrini S. (2017). Le Private Enforcement et le Public Enforcement après la directive 2014/104/UE: des nouvelles synergies pour un nouvel équilibre dans l’application du droit des pratiques anticoncurrentielles? In V. Giacobbo Peyronnel, C. Verdure (eds.), Contentieux du droit de la concurrence de l’Union européenne – Questions d’actualité et perspectives. Bruxelles: Larcier.
• Sauter W. (2016). Coherence in EU Competition Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Stuyck J. (2017). The Role of Preliminary References in the Uniform Application of EU Competition Law. In A. Almasan, P. Whelan (eds.), The Consistent Application of EU Competition Law: Substantive and Procedural Challenges. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
• Wijckmans F., Tuytschaever F. (2nd ed. 2011). Vertical Agreements in EU Competition Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Wilman F. (2015). Private Enforcement of EU Law Before National Courts: The EU Legislative Framework. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Identifiers

DOI

10.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2019.12.20.11

Biblioteka Nauki

2159159