Results found: 2

Search results

Search:
in the keywords: independent service provider

Sort By:

Limit search:

Liability for Anti-Competitive Conduct of a Third Party under EU Competition Law

100%

Knapp M.

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

2018

vol. 11(17)

75-92

The article discusses the framework of liability for anti-competitive conduct of a genuinely independent third party as set forth in relevant judgments. It refers to concepts of third party liability in the light of the principle of personal responsibility developed by doctrine and jurisprudence. The CJEU has set out important rules relating to liability of an undertaking for actions of its independent service provider. However, it still left some important issues unresolved. The paper focuses on the test for the attribution of anti-competitive conduct of a service provider and refers to its interpretation and application. It questions whether the introduced test provides sufficient legal certainty for undertakings. It briefs on the steps that must be taken by undertakings to distance themselves from an infringement and offers some suggestions how to limit or prevent exposure to liability

L’article traite du cadre de la responsabilité d’un tiers véritablement indépendante pour un comportement anticoncurrentiel, tel qu’énoncé dans les jugements pertinents. Il fait référence aux concepts de responsabilité d’un tiers à la lumière du principe de la responsabilité personnelle développé par la doctrine et la jurisprudence. La CJUE a énoncé des règles importantes relatives à la responsabilité d’une entreprise pour les actions de son prestataire de services indépendant. Cependant, certaines questions importantes n’ont toujours pas été résolues. L’article se focalise sur le test d’attribution du comportement anticoncurrentiel d’un prestataire de services et se réfère à son interprétation et à son application. Il s’interroge sur le point de savoir si le test introduit offre une sécurité juridique suffisante aux entreprises. Il fait un résumé des mesures à prendre par les entreprises pour se distancer par rapport à une infraction et propose des suggestions sur la manière de limiter ou d’empêcher toute exposition à la responsabilité.

Możliwość pociągnięcia do odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorcy za antykonkurencyjne zachowanie niezależnego usługodawcy. Glosa do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej z 21 lipca 2016 r. w sprawie VM Remonts SIA, Ausma grupa SIA przeciwko Konkurences padome (oraz Konkurences padome przeciwko Pārtikas kompānija SIA)

88%

Michałek-Gervais M.

internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny

2016

vol. 5

issue 7

116-122

The case comment relates to the judgment the Court of Justice of the European Union of 21 July 2016 in the case VM Remonts (C-542/14), delivered in response to a preliminary reference made by the Latvian Supreme Court. The question at stake referred to possibility to hold a company liable (in the light of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) for the anticompetitive behaviour of a third-party service provider. The Court of Justice did not follow the Opinion of the Advocate General Wathelet who suggested introducing rebuttable presumption of the company's liability in this respect. Instead, the Court of Justice held that a company should be only liable for the breach of competition law of a third-party service provider if one of three conditions are met (the service provider was acting under its direction or control; the company knew of the anticompetitive objectives of the service provider; or the company should have reasonably foreseen the anticompetitive behaviour of the service provider). The judgment is welcome as enforcing procedural justice and the companies' right to defence.

Refine search results

1 Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

1 internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny

1 2018

1 2016

1 Knapp M.

1 Michałek-Gervais M.

Search results

Liability for Anti-Competitive Conduct of a Third Party under EU Competition Law