Particularities of Proving a Single and Continuous Infringement of EU Competition Rules

• Authors: Mirna Romić Romić

Abstracts

FR

Une infraction unique et continue aux règles de concurrence de l’UE est une forme qualifiée d’infraction au droit de la concurrence de l’UE caractérisée par l’existence d’un projet commun aux entreprises ayant un objectif unique. Compte tenu de la spécificité de cette forme d’infraction, la preuve est différente de la procedure de preuve standard pour prouver les infractions aux règles de concurrence devant les tribunaux de l’UE. Cet article vise à donner un aperçu des règles de prevue à travers la jurisprudence de la Cour de justice de l’UE et à en analyser l’application dans la pratique.

EN

A single and continuous infringement of EU competition rules is a qualified form of infringement of EU Competition Law characterized by the existence of a global plan having a single objective between undertakings. Given the specificity of this form of infringement, proving it is somewhat different from the standard evidentiary process for proving infringements of competition rules before EU courts. This article aims to give an overview of the evidentiary rules through the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU and analyze their application in practice.

Keywords

EN

competition law; antitrust; infringement; cartels; single and continuous

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
• Journal: Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 13
• Issue: 22

Dates

published

2020

Contributors

author

Mirna Romić Romić

• Court of Justice of the European Union

References

• Alexiadis, P., Swanson, D.G., Guerrero, A. (2016). Raising the EU Evidentiary Bar for the ‘‘Single and Continuous Infringement’’ Doctrine. Concurrences Review Nº 4-2016, Art. Nº 81844. Retrieved from: https://www.concurrences.com/en/review/issues/no-4-2016/articles/raising-the-eu-evidentiary-bar-for-the-single-and-continuousinfringement-81844 (15.6.2020).
• Balasingham, B. (2016). The EU Leniency Policy: Reconciling Effectiveness and Fairness. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer.
• Burhart, J., Maulin, R. (2011). Proof in Cartels: State of Play and Perspectives. Concurrences, Nº 4-2011, 51–64. Retrieved from: http://awa2012.concurrences.com/academic/article/proof-in-cartels-state-of-play-and (15.6.2020).
• de la Torre, F.C., Fournier, E.G. (2017). Evidence, Proof and Judicial Review in EU Competition Law, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Forrester, I.S. (2009). Due Process in European Competition Cases: A Distinguished Institution With Flawed Procedures. European Law Review, 34(6), 817–843. Retrieved from: https://www.biicl.org/files/5749_forrester_25-06-11_biicl_1.pdf (15.6.2020).
• Idot, L. (2016). Réflexions sur la notion d’infraction unique et continue en droit européen de la concurrence. Concurrences Nº 4-2016, Art. Nº 8661. Retrieved from: https://www.concurrences.com/fr/revue/issues/no-4-2016/articles/reflexions-sur-la-notion-dinfraction-unique-et-continue-en-droit-europeen-de (15.6.2020).
• Pecotić Kaufman, J., Butorac Malnar, V. and Akšamović, D. (2019). International Encyclopedia for Competition Law, Croatia, Part II. Application of Prohibitions, Retrieved from: https://www.kluwerlawonline.com/ (15.6.2020).
• Petrović, S. (2018). Tržišno natjecanje u praksi Ustavnog suda Republike Hrvatske – osvrt na recentne odluke Ustavnog suda (U-III-952/2017 /Presečki/ i U-III-2791/2016, U-III-6196/2016, U-III-2826/2016, U-III-2820/2016 /zaštitari/). Retrieved from: https://hdpptn.hr/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/usud-tr%C5%BE-natj.pdf (15.6.2020).
• Riley, A. (2010). The Modernisation of EU Anti-Cartel Enforcement: Will the Commission Grasp an Opportunity? Centre for European Policy Studies Special Report, 2010. Retrieved from: http://aei.pitt.edu/14570/1/Modernisation_Final_e-version.pdf (15.6.2020).
• Riley, D. (2014). Revisiting the Single and Continuous Infringement of Article 101: The Significance of Anic in a New Era of Cartel Detection and Analysis. World Competition, 37(3), 293–317. Retrieved from: https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/kluwer-law-international/revisiting-the-single-and-continuous-infringement-of-article-101-the-s2PZ1bz7Yn (15.6.2020).
• Schrödinger, E. (1935). Die gegenwärtige Situation in der Quantenmechanik. Naturwissenschaften, 23, 807–849. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01491891 (5.10.2018).
• Studt, P. (2017). Case C-615/15 P Samsung SDI v Commission: The Concept of ‘Single and Continuous Infringement’ and Cartels. Continuity or Change? Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 8(10), 644–646. Retrieved from: https://academic.oup.com/jeclap/article/8/10/644/3854680 (15.6.2020).
• van Themaat, W.V., Reude, B. (eds) (2018). European Competition Law, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Identifiers

DOI

10.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2020.13.22.7

Biblioteka Nauki

2159068