Putting Dawn Raids under Control

• Authors: Jorge G. Contreras Condezo , Annabel Kingma , Miroslava Scholten

Abstracts

FR

« Dawn raids » sont devenus un moyen efficace de faire respecter le droit européen et national de la concurrence. Le contrôle judiciaire est un mécanisme essential de contrôle du pouvoir exécutif contre d’éventuels abus de ce pouvoir. Toutefois, ce contrôle judiciaire a montré ses limites ; il ne garantit pas toujours une reparation adéquate pour les parties concernées. Comment résoudre le problème du contrôle judiciaire limité pour assurer le contrôle des « dawn raids »? Cet article avance que les limites du contrôle juridictionnel pourraient être résolues en étendant les types de contrôle sur cette action, c’est-à-dire les orientations législatives ex ante et la responsabilité interne des administrateurs. Ainsi, la thèse plus conceptuelle de l’article est qu’il est essentiel de chercher des liens entre les différents concepts et types de contrôles pour garantir un système complet et efficace de contrôle des actions du pouvoir exécutif.

EN

Dawn raids have become an effective tool to enforce EU and national competition laws. Judicial review is an essential mechanism of control over the executive branch against possible misuse of this power. However, this judicial review has shown to have limits; it cannot always guarantee an adequate redress for the affected parties. How to address the limited judicial review to ensure control over dawn raids? This article argues that the limits of judicial review could be addressed by extending the types of controls over this action, i.e. ex ante legislative guidance and internal managerial accountability. The more conceptual argument that this paper puts forward is thus that it is essential to seek connections between different concepts and types of controls to ensure a comprehensive/water-tight system of controls over the actions of the executive branch.

Keywords

EN

dawn raids; competition law; control; judicial review

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydział Nauk Ekonomicznych
• Journal: Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 13
• Issue: 22
• Pages: 145-168

Dates

published

2020

Contributors

author

Jorge G. Contreras Condezo

• Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru
• Utrecht University

author

Annabel Kingma

author

Miroslava Scholten

• Utrecht Centre for Regulation and Enforcement in Europe

• https://orcid.org/0000000235214936

References

• Andersson, H. (2017). Dawn Raids under Challenge, Stockholm: US-AB Digitaltryckeri. Retrieved from https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1051228/FULLTEXT01.pdf (30.05.2019).
• Arnull, A. (2011). The principle of effective judicial protection in EU law: an unruly horse, European Law Review, 36(1), 51–70.
• Australian Securities and Investments Commission (2017). Positions and Consultation Paper 2: Harmonisation and Enhancement of Search Warrant Powers, ASIC Enforcement Review.
• Błachucki, M. and Jóźwiak, S. (2012). Exchange of Information and Evidence between Competition Authorities and Entrepreneurs’ Rights, Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies, 5(6), 137–167. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2130849.
• Citrom, P (2020). The EU General Court partially annuls the decisions of the Commission to order dawn raids of a number of French retailers (Casino, Guichard-Perrachon / Achats Marchandises Casino) (Intermarché Casino Achats) (Les Mousquetaires / ITM Entreprises), e-Competitions, October 2020 – II, Art. N° 97230, https://www.concurrences.com/en/bulletin/news-issues/october-2020-ii-en/the-eu-general-courtpartially-annuls-the-decisions-of-the-commission-to-order
• Competition and Markets Authority (2019). Competition Act 1998: Guidance on the CMA’s investigation procedures in Competition Act 1998 cases. Retrieved from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/771970/CMA8_CA98_guidance.pdf
• Cooper, T. (1950). The Common and the Civil Law. A Scot’s View, Harvard Law Review, 63(3), 468–475, http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1336245
• ECN Working Group on Competition Issues. (2008). Results of the questionnaire on the reform of Member States (MS) national competition laws after EC Regulation No 1/2003.
• ECN Working Group Cooperation Issues and Due Process. (2012). Investigative Powers Report.
• European Commission. (2011). Decision of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings, OJ L 275, 2011-695.
• European Commission. (2018). Antitrust: Commission confirms unannounced inspections in the metal packaging sector. Retrieved from: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-18-3662_en.htm (30.05.2019).
• European Commission. (2019a). Cartel Statistics. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/cartels/statistics/statistics.pdf (30.05.2019).
• European Commission. (2019b). Antitrust: Commission confirms unannounced inspections in the farmed Atlantic salmon sector. Retrieved from http://europa.eu/rapid/pressrelease_STATEMENT-19-1310_en.htm (30.05.2019).
• Harding, C. and Joshua, J. (2010). Regulating Cartels in Europe: A Study o Legal Control of Corporate Delinquency, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hüschelrach, K., Laitenberger, U. and Smuda, F. (2013). Cartel Enforcement in the European Union: Determinants of the Duration of Investigations, European Competition Law Review, 34(1), 33–39.
• Leczykiewicz, D. (2010). Effective Judicial Protection’ of Human Rights after Lisbon: Should National Courts Be Empowered to Review EU Secondary Law?, European Law Review, 35, 326–348. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1630906.
• Messina, M. (2007). The Protection of the Right to Private Life, Home and Correspondence v the Efficient Enforcement of Competition Law’: Is a New EC Competition Court the Right Way Forward?, European Competition Journal, 3(1), 185–212, https://doi.org/10.1080/17441056.2007.11428454.
• OECD. (2013). Unannounced Inspections in Antitrust Investigations. Peru: OECD. Retrieved from: https://one.oecd.org/document/DAF/COMP/LACF(2013)6/en/pdf (30.05.2019).
• Pinotti, V. (2018). Janssen Cilag S.A.S. v. France: Antitrust Dawn Raids do not Violate Human Rights Law in Case of Effective Judicial Review, Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 9(1), 28–30, https://doi.org/10.1093/jeclap/lpx053.
• Rees, J. (1997). The Development of Communitarian Regulation in the Chemical Industry, Law and Policy, 19, 477–528, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9930.00036.
• Scholten, M. (2019). Shared tasks, but separated controls: Building the system of control for shared administration in an EU multijurisdictional setting, EJRR, forthcoming.
• Scordamaglia-Tousis, A. (2013), EU Cartel Enforcement – Reconciling Effective Public Enforcement with Fundamental Rights, Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer.
• Steene, A. (2016). Nexans, Deutsche Bahn, and the ECJ’s Refusal to Follow ECHR Case Law on Dawn Raids, Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 7(3), 180–193, https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jeclap/lpw001.
• Townley, C. (2018). A Framework for European Competition Law: Co-ordinated Diversity, Oxford: Hart Publishing.
• Verbruggen, P. (2013). Gorillas in the Closet? Public and Private Actors in the Enforcement of Transnational Private Regulation, Regulation & Governance, 7(4), 512–532, https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12026.
• Vestager, M. (2017). Competition and the Rule of Law. Speech delivered at the Romanian Competition Council Anniversary Event, Bucharest.
• Vestager, M. (2019). Competition and the Rule of Law. Speech delivered at the European Association of Judges, Copenhagen.
• Wils, W. (2006). Powers of Investigation and Procedural Rights and Guarantees in EU Antitrust Enforcement: The Interplay Between European and National Legislation and Case-law, World Competition, 29(1), 3–24. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1319243.

Identifiers

DOI

10.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2020.13.22.6

Biblioteka Nauki

2159037