New Scenarios of the Right of Defence Following Directive 1/2019

• Authors: Marialaura Rea

Abstracts

FR

Le présent article a pour objectif d’analyser les effets de l’article 3 de la directive 1/2019 lors de sa transposition par les États membres. Le caractère incomplet et imprécis de l’article 3 de la directive 1/2019 pourrait provoquer une non-harmonisation dans les différents États membres de l’UE, notamment en Europe orientale, des droits de la défense dans la procédure en matière de concurrence. Plus précisément, pour éviter cet effet, les États membres doivent s’adapter aux normes européennes. Le présent article entend apporter un éclairage sur la manière dont les droits de la défense sont protégés par la Commission européenne dans le cadre des procedures en matière de concurrence.

EN

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the effects of Article 3 of Directive 1/2019 when transposing it by Member States. The incompleteness and vagueness of Article 3 of Directive 2019/1 could cause non-harmonization in the various EU Member States, especially those in Eastern Europe, of the right of defence for the defendant party in the antitrust procedure. More specifically, to avoid this effect, Member States must adapt to European standards. In doing so, the paper intends to shed some light on how the right of defence is protected by the European Commission during competition proceedings.

Keywords

EN

right of defence; due process; ECN+ Directive; National Competition; Authorities; European Commission

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
• Journal: Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 12
• Issue: 20
• Pages: 111-126

Dates

published

2019

Contributors

author

Marialaura Rea

• Parthenope University of Naples
• Italian Competition Authority

References

• Assonime (2017). I poteri delle autorità antitrust nazionali e le garanzie: verso la direttiva ECN+ – Workshop Assonime – Associazione Antitrust Italia, Rome, November; (electronic resource) available at: http://www.assonime.it/_layouts/15/Assonime.CustomAction/GetPdfToUrl.aspx?PathPdf=http://www.assonime.it/attivita-editoriale/studi/Documents/Note%20e%20Studi%201-2018.pdf.
• Bernatt M., Botta M., Svetlicinii A. (2018). The right of Defence in the Decentralized System of EU Competition Law Enforcement. A call for Harmonization from Central and Eastern Europe, World Competition, 41.
• Botta M. (2018). The right of defence in ECN+ Directive, (electronic resource) available at: http://fcp.eui.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/02/2_BOTTA-seminar-ECN-13.8.2017.pdf.
• Botta M., Svetlicinii A. (2015). The Right of Fair Trial in Competition Law Proceedings: Quo Vadis the Courts of the New EU Member States? in T. Skoczny, P. Nihoul (eds) Procedural Fairness in Competition Proceedings, Edward Elgar.
• Caragiale L. (2018). The competition enforcement design in the EU at crossroads, (electronic resource) http://fcp.eui.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/02/4_Presentation-Valentin-Mircea-FCP-15.09.2018.pdf.
• Cengiz F. (2010). Multi-Level Governance in Competition Policy: the European Competition Network, European Law Review, Vol. 35.
• Chiappanini A. (2012). The right of access to file in European competition proceedings and judicial protection, Diritto 24, 3 February 2012.
• D’Alberti M., La rete europea delle autorità di concorrenza,(electronic resource) available at: http://www.learlab.it/Relazioni/D%27Alberti.pdf.
• Denkers M. (2018). ECN+ and the Dutch practice, A NCA perspective on ECN+, (electronic resource) available at: http://fcp.eui.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/02/5_Denkers_180915-Florence-ECN-and-the-Dutch-practice-1.pdf.
• Durande S., Williams K. (2005). The practical impact of the exercise of the right to be heard: A special focus on the effect of Oral Hearings and the role of the Hearing Officers, Competition Policy Newsletter, 2, available at: ec.europa.eu/competition/publications/2005, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/publications/cpn/2005_2_22.pdf.
• Gardner P., Ward T. (2003). The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: In Search of Legal Certainty, European Human Rights Law Review, 4.
• Gerber D.J. (2005). The Evolution of a European Competition Law Network, in C. Ehlermann, I. Atanasiu (eds.) Competition Law Annual 2002: Constructing the EU Network of Competition Authorities, Hart; available at: www.http://works.bepress.com/david_gerber/46.
• Ghezzi F., Marchetti B. (2017). La proposta di direttiva in materia di Rete europea della Concorrenza e la necessità di un giusto equilibrio tra efficienza e garanzie, Rivista italiana di Diritto Pubblico Comunitario, 5.
• Gippini-Fournier E. (2005). Legal Privilege in Competition Proceedings before the European Commission: beyond the Cursory Glance, International Law Journal Fordham J. Int’l L., Vol. 28, Book 4, available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=635963.
• Guerri E. (2005). L’applicazione del diritto antitrust in Italia dopo il regolamento CE n. 1/2003, Giappichelli.
• Kim S., Levitt M. (2010). Legal Professional Privilege Under European Union Law – Navigating the Unresolved Questions Following the Akzo Judgment, Antitrust & Trade Regulation Report, 99 ATRR 565, 11/05/2010.
• McBride J. (2009). Human rights and criminal procedure The case law of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg 2009.
• Michałek M. (2015). Right to defence in EU Competition law: the case of inspections, Warsaw.
• Monti G. (2018). ECN Plus Directive: Empowering NCAs? Strengthening the Network?, European National Institute, (electronic resource) available at: http://fcp.eui.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/02/1_Monti-FCP2018-ECN-plus.pdf.
• Ortiz Blanco L. (2006). EC Competition Procedure, Oxford University Press.
• Pace L.F. (2004). La politica di decentramento del diritto antitrust CE come principio organizzatore del regolamento 1/2003: luci ed ombre del nuovo regolamento di applicazione degli artt. 81 e 82 TCE, Rivista italiana di Diritto Pubblico Comunitario, 1.
• Papp F.W. (2019). Directive of European Parliament and of the Council to empower the competition authorities of the Member States to be more effective enforcers and to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market (“ECN Directive”), Competition Policy International, 1; available at: https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/directive-of-the-european-parliament-and-of-the-council-to-empower-the-competitionauthorities-of-the-member-states-to-be-more-effective-enforcers-and-to-ensure-theproper-functioning-of-the-internal/.
• Parcu P.L. (2018). ECN+ Directive Consequences for fines and Compliance Programmes, (electronic resource) available at: http://fcp.eui.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/02/3_Final_PARCU-ECN-plus-Directive-1-1.pdf.
• Pera A., Pace V. (2003). The Modernisation of EC Competition Law and the Role of National Competition Authorities – Revolution or Evolution?, Il Diritto dell’Unione Europea, 2.
• Brammer S. (2005). Concurrent Jurisdiction under Regulation 1/2003 and the Issue of Case Allocation, Common Market Law Review, Vol. 42, No. 5.
• Torchia L. (2006). Il governo delle differenze. Il principio di equivalenza nell’ordinamento europeo, Bologna, 2006.
• Türk A. (2006). Modernisation of EC Antitrust Enforcement, in H.C.H. Hofmann, A. Türk (eds), EU Administrative Governance, Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Völcker S.B. (2004). Developments in EC Competition Law in 2003: An Overview, Common Market Law Review, Vol. 41, No. 4.
• Wilks S. (2005). Agency Escape: Decentralization or Dominance of the European Commission in the Modernization of Competition Policy? Governance, 18(3).
• Wils W.P.J. (2008). Efficiency and Justice in European Antitrust Enforcement, Hart.
• Wils W.P.J. (2017). Competition Authorities: Towards more Independence and Prioritization? The European Commission’s “ECN+” Proposal for a Directive to Empower the Competition Authority of the Member States to be more Effective Enforcers, Paris.

Identifiers

DOI

10.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2019.12.20.4

Biblioteka Nauki

2159126