Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Wyszukujesz frazę "private/public" wg kryterium: Temat


Wyświetlanie 1-11 z 11
Tytuł:
Antitrust Private Enforcement – Case of Poland
Autorzy:
Jurkowska, Agata
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530057.pdf
Data publikacji:
2008-12-01
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
private and public enforcement
private parties
antitrust damages
court proceedings
collective redress
damage actions
Opis:
This article presents the main difficulties surrounding private enforcement of antitrust law in Poland, currently the key implementation problem in the field of antitrust law. Whereas the basic standards concerning the public pillar of antitrust enforcement have already been established, either in the European Community (EC) or in its Member States, the private pillar of antitrust enforcement has not yet been fully developed. The fact that private enforcement of antitrust law is possible, and in fact equal, to public enforcement is not yet commonly recognized. In response to the European Commission’s White Paper on Damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules, private enforcement of antirust law is presently under intense discussion in EC Member States. This article should be considered as one of the contributions to this debate. It presents the main legal framework of private enforcement of antitrust law in Poland. In order to do so, it directly refers to the Polish Act on competition and consumer protection, the Civil Code and the Civil Procedure Code. This article also discusses Polish case law in this area. It aims to assess whether existing Polish legal provisions are, in fact, sufficient to ensure effective private enforcement of Polish as well as EC antitrust law. The article refers to the main proposals of the European Commission’s White Paper. It is concluded that private enforcement of antitrust law is indeed possible in Poland on the basis of currently applicable procedural rules, even if there are no special instruments designed to facilitate it. However, it cannot be expect that in the current legal climate, private parties will eagerly and frequently apply for damages in cases of a breach of Polish antitrust law. Antitrust cases are special in many aspects and, thus, they require specific solutions in procedural terms. This article aims to pinpoint those areas, where the Polish law needs to be changed in order to develop and promote private enforcement of antitrust law in Poland.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2008, 1(1); 59-79
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Individuals and the Enforcement of Competition Law – Recent Development of the Private Enforcement Doctrinein Polish and European Antitrust Law
Autorzy:
Gac, Maciej
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530053.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-06-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
collective redress
damages actions
group litigation
private enforcement
public enforcement
Opis:
The following article focuses on the issue of private enforcement of competition law as one of the key elements of the current European and national debate on the efficiency of competition law. By analyzing this concept, the article aims to determine the influence of the European private enforcement model on the national competition law enforcement practice. The goal of the analysis is to answer two main questions: Does the current convergence of the national competition law enforcement system towards the European model guarantee the establishment of an effective, public-private system of antitrust enforcement? Under which conditions may the development of private methods of antitrust enforcement lead to an increase in the efficiency of Polish and European competition law? In order to address these questions, the article analyses the development of the private enforcement doctrine in the European Union and Poland. It refers to European and Polish jurisprudence on private enforcement, the competition policy of the European Commission as well as of the Polish competition authority – the UOKiK President. It also covers recent legislative changes introduced in the European and national legal orders. The analysis leads to the conclusion that the current convergence of the national antirust system towards the European model did not lead to the establishment of an effective mechanism of private enforcement in Poland. Nevertheless, the assessment of recent changes at the European level gives grounds to assume that the adoption of the Directive on Damages Actions, and its transposition into the national legal order, might overcome this problem and allow for better protection of individuals against anti-competitive behaviors.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(11); 53-82
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
The Interaction Between Public and Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: a Case Study of the Swedish Booking Cases
Autorzy:
Voss, Katharina
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2158939.pdf
Data publikacji:
2020-09-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
Booking.com
EU competition law
MFN clause
OTAs
private
enforcement
public enforcement
Opis:
This article studies the private enforcement conducted in Visita v Booking from the perspective of the interaction between public and private enforcement of competition law. This case concerned the question whether the narrow MFN clauses maintained by Booking were contrary to Article 101 TFEU and could therefore be prohibited by a Swedish court. The focus of this article is placed on the assessment carried out by the Swedish courts to determine whether the MFN clauses were restrictive of competition by effect and on the standard of proof attached to the claimant in this regard. With regard to the interaction between public and private enforcement, Visita v. Booking is viewed as an illustration of the increased complexity of competition policy, in particular were novel practices are at issue.
Cet article examine l’application privée pour les infractions aux dispositions du droit de la concurrence menée dans l’affaire Visita contre Booking en ce qui concerne l’interaction avec l’application publique du droit de la concurrence. Cette affaire portait sur la question de déterminer si les clauses de la Nation la Plus Favorisée restrictives appliquées par Booking étaient contraires à l’article 101 du TFUE et pouvaient donc être interdites par un tribunal suédois. Le présent article est centré sur l’évaluation effectuée par les juridictions suédoises afin de déterminer si les clauses de la Nation la Plus Favorisée étaient restrictives de la concurrence par effet et sur le niveau de preuve attaché à cet égard. En ce qui concerne l’interaction entre l’application publique et privée, l’affaire Visita v. Booking est considérée comme une illustration de la complexité accrue de la politique de concurrence, en particulier lorsque des pratiques nouvelles sont en cause.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2020, 13, 21; 55-71
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
The Impact of EU Law on a National Competition Authoritys Leniency Programme – the Case of Poland
Autorzy:
Sitarek, Piotr
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530320.pdf
Data publikacji:
2014
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
competition law
leniency, antitrust damages actions
access to evidence
procedural autonomy
efficiency
public enforcement
private enforcement
Opis:
This paper is devoted to the impact of EU law on national leniency programmes, especially the Polish one. It analyses the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice in Pfleiderer, Donau Chemie and Schenker and identifies three specific areas of potential EU influence on national leniency programmes. The impact of EU law on the rules of access to leniency documents is analysed in detail on the basis of both EU and Polish law and taking into account the Draft Directive on Antitrust Damages Actions. The paper covers also the extent to which the principle of effectiveness of EU law limits the procedural autonomy of Member States in regard to their leniency programmes. This analysis covers both “negative conditions”, that is, elements of national leniency programmes which are incompatible with EU law, and “positive conditions”, in order words, those elements of domestic leniency programmes which are seen as necessary for securing their effectiveness.
L'article concerne l'influence du droit de l‘Union européenne sur les programmes de clémence nationaux, en particulier le programme polonais. La jurisprudence de la Cour de justice de l’Union européenne est analysée, surtout les arrêts en Pfleiderer, Donau Chemie et Schenker. Les trois avenues de l'influence du droit européen sur le programme de clémence sont identifiés – les règles d'accès aux confessions des entreprises bénéficiaires de la clémence, qui sont analysées en détaille, les limitations des programmes nationaux de clémence à cause du principe d'effectivité et les obligations des autorités nationales de concurrence d’assurer l'effectivité des programmes de clémence
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2014, 7(9); 185-216
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Private Enforcement of Competition Law – the Case of Estonia
Autorzy:
Sein, Karin
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530240.pdf
Data publikacji:
2013-12-01
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust damage claim
collective redress
Estonia
evidence
private enforcement of competition law
public enforcement of competition law
Opis:
Jurisprudence on private enforcement of competition law has so far been almost non-existent in Estonia. Most cases where competition law issues are raised within the context of damage claims are solved by out-of-court settlements. One of the main reasons for this scarcity is the fact that this is a fairly unfamiliar field for Estonian lawyers, attorneys and judges. The first reason for the low number of private enforcement of competition law cases in Estonia is therefore lacking awareness and legal uncertainty. The other key barrier lies in burden of proof issues associated with damage claims. It has proven very difficult in practice for an injured person to prove that he/she sustained damages as a result of a competition law infringement; even more so to prove the actual extent of such damages. There is no juridical practice yet on how to calculate business losses and judges face considerable difficulties when confronted with this task. Another problem lies in the availability of evidence. As discovery is not possible in Estonia, its civil procedure rules make it difficult for claimants to obtain evidence necessary to prove the facts underlying their claims. Estonian law does not provide for a special procedure for antitrust damage claims – there are no collective claims, no class actions, nor actions by representative bodies or other forms of public interest litigation (no collective redress). It is thus only possible to file damage claims arising from competition law infringements either in normal civil proceedings or as a civil claim within the framework of criminal proceedings on a competition law crime. The need for collective redress has not yet been subject to a legal debate at the national level, and there has not been a single private enforcement case opened by a consumer in Estonia so far. The only Supreme Court case in existence in this field, which was decided in 2011, has cleared the basis and availability of damage claims for competition law infringement. It has shown, at the same time, the many problems connected to calculating damages in this context.
La jurisprudence relative à l’application privée du droit de la concurrence a été jusqu’à présent presque absente en Estonie. La plupart des cas où les questions de droit de la concurence sont soulevées dans le cadre de demandes d’indemnisation, sont résolus par des règlements à l’amiable. L’une des raisons principales de cette pénurie est le fait que c’est un domaine assez inconnu pour les avocats, les procureurs et les juges estoniens. La première raison pour le faible nombre de cas de l’application privée du droit de la concurrence en Estonie est donc la manque de conscience et l’incertitude juridique. L’autre obstacle majeur réside dans des questions relatives à la charge de preuve liées à des demandes d ‘indemnisation. Il s’est avéré très difficile en pratique pour une personne blessée à prouver qu’il/elle a subi des dommages à la suite d’une infraction au droit de la concurrence ; plus encore à prouver l’étendue exacte de tels dommages. Il n’existe pas encore de pratique juridique sur la façon de calculer les pertes commerciales. Alors les juges font face à des difficultés considérables lorsqu’ils sont confrontés à cette tâche. Un autre problème réside dans la disponibilité de la preuve. A cause du fait que la découverte n’est pas possible en Estonie, ses règles de procédure civile rendent l’obtention des preuves nécessaires pour soutenir les faits qui prouvent des revendications soumis par des demandeurs difficile. La législation estonienne ne prévoit pas de procédure spéciale pour les demandes de dommages antitrust – il n’y a pas de revendications collectives, aucune action de classe, ni des measures prises par les organes représentatifs ou d’autres formes de litiges d’intérêt public (pas de resours collectif). Il n’est donc possible que de déposer des demandes d’indemnsation en cas d’infraction au droit de la concurrence soit dans les procédures civiles normales, soit comme une action civile dans le cadre d’une procédure pénale sur un crime de droit de la concurrence. La nécessité de recours collectif n’a pas encore fait l’objet d’un débat juridique au niveau national, et il n’a pas eu en Estonie un seul cas de l’application privée ouverte par un consommateur jusqu’à présent. Le seul cas qui a été présenté à la Cour suprême en ce domaine (le jugement a été prononcé en 2011), a autorisé la base et la disponibilité des demandes d’indemnisation pour violation du droit de la concurrence. Il a présenté en même temps les problèmes nombreux reliés à la calculation des dommages dans ce contexte-là.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2013, 6(8); 129-139
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Slovenia: A New Field to Be Developed by Slovenian Courts
Autorzy:
Brkan, Maja
Bratina, Tanja
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/529970.pdf
Data publikacji:
2013-12-01
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust damage
collective redress
evidence
nullity
private enforcement of competition law
public enforcement of competition law
Slovenia
Opis:
This contribution aims to demonstrate the legal framework that can shape and influence private enforcement in Slovenia. This includes, in particular, conditions for damage claims, collective redress mechanisms, legal costs and fees as well as discovery and burden of proof. It is shown which legislative changes may be needed in order to improve the effectiveness of private enforcement and the practical obstacles that will have to be overcome in the future. Furthermore, the article analyses the jurisprudence of Slovenian courts concerning private enforcement. Although there was practically no jurisprudence in this area only a few years ago, Slovenian courts have now ruled on a few such cases already. The number of private enforcement proceedings will most likely increase in the future. Therefore, it can be stated that private enforcement of competition law is an area that is slowly, but steadily, gaining importance in the Slovenian legal system.
La présente contribution vise à démontrer le cadre juridique susceptible de former et d’influencer la mise en œuvre des règles de concurrence de l'UE à l'initiative de la sphère privée (« private enforcement ») en Slovénie. Les conditions pour des recours en dommages et intérêts, des mécanismes des recours collectifs, des règles sur des dépens ainsi que la divulgation des preuves et la charge de la preuve y sont analysés. La contribution démontre quelles modifications législatives seraient nécessaires et quelles obstacles pratiques devront être surmontés à l’avenir afin d’améliorer l’effectivité de ce type de mise en œuvre du droit de la concurrence. La jurisprudence des juridictions Slovènes dans ce domaine y est également analysée. Même si cette jurisprudence a été pratiquement inexistante il y a quelques années, les juridictions Slovènes ont, jusqu’à présent, rendu déjà quelques arrêts dans ce domaine et il est à attendre que le nombre de ce type d’affaires accroîtra dans le futur. Ainsi, il est possible de constater que l’importance de ce type de mise en œuvre du droit de la concurrence augmentera lentement mais sûrement dans l’ordre juridique slovène.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2013, 6(8); 75-106
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Polish Courts: The Story of an (Almost) Lost Hope for Development
Autorzy:
Jurkowska-Gomułka, Agata
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530095.pdf
Data publikacji:
2013-12-01
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust damage
collective redress
evidence
nullity
private enforcement of competition law
Polska
public enforcement of competition law
Opis:
The article reviews judgments of Polish courts on private enforcement of competition law between 1993 and 2012. A quantitative analysis of this jurisprudence shows that very few cases of that type exist at all. Their qualitative characteristics illustrate that: none of them referred to consumers; none of the claims was a 'pure' damage claim; all of these cases focused on partial or general nullity of contracts concluded as a result of an anticompetitive practice; almost all of them concerned an abuse of a dominant position; only one referred to competition-restricting agreements. The relevant jurisprudence largely focused on the binding force of a prior decision of the Polish competition body upon civil courts. Even if the fact that some cases of this type were at all record might suggest that there is a potential for developing private enforcement of antitrust in Poland, nothing like this actually happened. Unfortunately, the Act on Collective Redress (in force since July 2010) has not contributed to a growth in the number of consumers (or any other entities) engaging in court disputes with undertakings restricting competition.
L’article passe en revue les jugements des tribunaux polonais sur l’application privée du droit de la concurrence entre 1993 et 2012. Une analyse quantitative de cette jurisprudence montre que très peu de cas de ce type existent. Leurs caractéristiques qualitatives montrent que : aucun d’entre eux ne concernait les consommateurs ; aucune des revendications ne constituait une demande d’indemnisation dans le sense exacte ; tous ces cas axaient sur la nullité partielle ou générale des contrats conclus à la suite d‘une pratique anticoncurrentielle ; la quasi-totalité d’entre eux concernaient un abus de position dominante ; une seule visait aux accords restreignant la concurrence. La jurisprudence se concentrait surtout sur la force contraignante d’une décision préalable de l’organe polonais de la concurrence prise par des tribunaux civils. Même si le fait que certains cas de ce type-là étaient notés, il pourrait suggérer qu’il existe un potentiel de développement de l’application privée de la concurrence en Pologne – rien que cela ne s’est réellement passé. Malheureusement, la Loi sur les recours collectif (en vigueur depuis juillet 2010) n’a pas contribué à une augmentation du nombre de consommateurs (ou d’autres entités) s’engageant dans des litiges judiciaires avec les entreprises qui restreignent la concurrence.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2013, 6(8); 107-128
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
The Interaction of Public and Private Enforcement of Competition Law before and after the EU Directive – a Hungarian perspective
Autorzy:
Toth, Tihamer
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/529889.pdf
Data publikacji:
2016-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
private enforcement of competition law
public enforcement
discovery
leniency
damages
joint and several liability
amicus curiae
class action
representative action
Opis:
The paper explores the changes the EU Directive on harmonizing certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions will bring about in Hungary, with a special focus placed on damages liability rules, the interaction of public and private enforcement of these rules, and the importance of class actions. Amendments of the Competition Act introduced in 2005 and 2009 had created new rules to promote the idea of private enforcement even before the Directive was adopted. Some of these rules remain unique even now, notably the legal presumption of a 10% price increase for cartel cases. However, subsequent cases decided by Hungarian courts did not reflect the sophistication of existing substantive and procedural rules. There has only ever been one judgment awarding damages, while most stand-alone cases involved minor competition law issues relating to contractual disputes. The paper looks at the most important substantial rules of tort law (damage, causality, joint and several liability), the co-operation of competition authorities and civil courts, as well as at (the lack of) class action procedures from the perspective of the interaction of public and private enforcement of competition law.
Le document analyse les changements apportés par la directive européenne relative aux certaines règles régissant les actions en dommages et intérêts en droit national pour les infractions aux dispositions du droit de la concurrence en Hongrie, en particulier concernant les règles sur la responsabilité civile en matière de dommages, l’interaction de l’application publique et privée du droit de la concurrence et l'importance des recours collectifs. Les modifications à loi de la concurrence introduites en 2005 et 2009 ont créé de nouvelles règles pour promouvoir l'idée d'une application privée du droit de la concurrence même avant que la directive a été adoptée. Certaines de ces dispositions sont toujours uniques, notamment la présomption légale d'une augmentation de prix de 10% par les ententes. Néanmoins, les jugements ultérieurs rendus par les tribunaux ne reflétaient pas les règles de fond et de procédures sophistiquées. Il n’y avait juste le jugement qui a accordé des dommages et intérêts, alors que la plupart des actions autonomes (« stand-alone actions ») portaient sur des problèmes secondaires du droit de la concurrence liés aux conflits contractuels. L’article examine des règles les plus importantes du droit de la responsabilité civile (le dommage, la causalité, la responsabilité solidaire), la coopération entre les autorités de la concurrence et les tribunaux civils, ainsi que l’absence de mécanisme de recours collectifs et de la perspective de l’application publique et privée du droit de la concurrence.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2016, 9(14); 43-68
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
How to Throw the Baby out with the Bath Water. A Few Remarks on the Currently Accepted Scope of Civil Liability for Antitrust Damages
Autorzy:
Jurkowska-Gomułka, Agata
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530217.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust civil liability
damage
Directive 12014/104
joint and several liability
immunity recipient
private enforcement of competition law
public enforcement of competition law
umbrella pricing
Opis:
The Damages Directive introduces the right to ‘full compensation’ and the principle of ‘joint and several liability’ for antitrust damages (Article 3(1) and Article 11(1) respectively). The Directive does not determine the type of damage that can be awarded in civil proceedings. In theory, there are thus no barriers to establish punitive, multiple or other damages. In practice, it is rather unlikely that such types of damages will be awarded after the implementation of the Directive due to the ban placed on overcompensation in its Article 2(3). This paper will try to decode the concept of ‘full compensation’ and ‘joint and several liability’ in light of the Damages Directive as well as EU jurisprudence. An adequate understanding of these terms is without a doubt one of the key preconditions of correctly implementing the Directive and, consequently, a condition for making EU (competition) law effective. While on the one hand, a limitation of the personal scope of civil liability can currently be observed in EU law (covering both legislation and case law), a broadening of its subject-matter scope is visible on the other hand. With reference to the personal scope of civil liability, the Directive itself limits the applicability of the joint and several responsibility principle towards certain categories of infringers: small & medium enterprises (Article 11(2)) and immunity recipients in leniency (Article 11(3)). Considering the subject-matter scope of civil liability, the acceptance by the Court of Justice of civil liability for the ‘price umbrella effect’ should be highlighted. In addition, the principle of the ‘passing-on defence’ can also be regarded as a manner of broadening the scope of civil liability for antitrust damage (Article 12–16). The paper will present an overview of the scope of civil liability for antitrust damages (in its personal and subject-matter dimension) in light of the Directive and EU jurisprudence. The paper’s goal is to assess if the applicable scope will in fact guarantee the effective development of private competition law enforcement in EU Member States. This assessment, as the very title of this paper suggests, will be partially critical.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(12); 61-78
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Development of Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Lithuania
Autorzy:
Moisejevas, Raimundas
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/529902.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-06-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust damage
antitrust damage claims
Directive on antitrust damages actions
evidence
follow-on action
Lithuania
nullity
private enforcement of competition law
public enforcement of competition law
Opis:
The article reviews the jurisprudence of Lithuanian courts on private enforcement of competition law and identifies the main obstacles for the development of this practice. The analysis of the jurisprudence makes it possible to summarise that: most rulings of the Lithuanian courts relate to cases on the abuse of dominance; usually, dominant undertakings were allegedly applying discriminatory conditions towards the injured party and; most of the claims were presented as follow-on actions after a decision of the Competition Council. The courts held that damages caused by a breach of competition law have to be recovered in accordance with Lithuania’s main principles of civil responsibility. At the same time, the courts made it clear that their jurisprudence is based on the rulings of European Courts and the main principles of EU competition law. The main obstacles for the successful development of antitrust damages claims in Lithuania are, inter alia: complexity of competition cases; difficulty in obtaining substantive evidence; proving a consequential relationship and; high legal costs. The article also analyses substantial and procedural provisions of Lithuanian legislation that regulate the submission of antitrust damage claims.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(11); 35-52
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
The EU 2018 Draft Directive on UTPs in B2b Food Supply Chains and the Polish 2016 Act on Combating the Unfair Use of Superior Bargaining Power in the Trade in Agricultural and Food Products
Autorzy:
Piszcz, Anna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530328.pdf
Data publikacji:
2018-08-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
superior bargaining power
unfair use of superior bargaining power
trade in agricultural and food products
agricultural and food sector
public enforcement
private enforcement
enforcement authority
national competition authority
unfair trading practices
UTPs
business-to-business relationships
food supply chain
B2b food supply chain
small and medium-sized entrepreneurs
small and medium-sized enterprises
SMEs
suppliers
producers
producer organisations
associations of producer organisations
non-SMEs
buyers
‘one-sided’ protection
Opis:
The Polish Act on Counteracting the Unfair Use of Superior Bargaining Power in the Trade in Agricultural and Food Products was adopted on 15 December 2016 and entered into force on 12 July 2017. The new legal framework resembles, in some places, the legal rules contained in the 2007 Act on Competition and Consumer Protection, elsewhere resembles the 1993 Act on Combating Unfair Competition. Therefore, the article reviews the new Polish provisions taking into account the previous system including the prohibition of the abuse of a dominant position and the prohibition of unfair competition. This publication is intended to point out the peculiarities that characterize the new provisions. Readers will find here an assessment of recent Polish developments and suggestions for further development of the Polish legal framework in the EU context. In particular, the review critically analyses some solutions of the 2018 EU draft Directive on unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships in the food supply chain and shows what amendments to the Polish legal framework will be needed, if the Directive is adopted in the current version.
La loi polonaise sur la lutte contre l’utilisation déloyale du pouvoir de négociation supérieure dans le commerce des produits agricoles et alimentaires a été adoptée le 15 décembre 2016 et est entrée en vigueur le 12 juillet 2017. Le nouveau cadre juridique ressemble, à certains endroits, aux règles juridiques contenues dans la loi de 2007 sur la concurrence et la protection des consommateurs, qui ressemble d’ailleurs à la loi de 1993 sur la lutte contre la concurrence déloyale. Par conséquent, l’article examine les nouvelles dispositions polonaises en tenant compte du système précédent, notamment l’interdiction de l’abus de position dominante et l’interdiction de la concurrence déloyale. Cette publication est censée mettre en évidence les particularités qui caractérisent les nouvelles dispositions. Les lecteurs trouveront ici une évaluation des développements récents en Pologne et des suggestions pour le développement du cadre juridique polonais dans le contexte de l’UE. En particulier l’article analyse de manière critique certaines solutions du projet de directive de l’UE de 2018 sur les pratiques commerciales déloyales dans les relations interentreprises au sein de la chaîne d’approvisionnement alimentaire et indique quelles modifications dans le cadre juridique polonais seront nécessaires si la directive soit adoptée dans la version actuelle.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2018, 11(17); 143-167
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-11 z 11

    Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies