Informacja

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

Wyszukujesz frazę "Blažo, Ondrej" wg kryterium: Autor


Wyświetlanie 1-4 z 4
Tytuł:
Twenty Years of Harmonisation and Still Divergent: Development of Slovak Competition Law
Autorzy:
Blažo, Ondrej
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530203.pdf
Data publikacji:
2014
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
competition law
Slovak competition law
EU competition law
harmonisation of competition law
divergence from EU law
European Commission
concept of undertaking
essential facilities
settlement procedure
Opis:
Since the time when the first competition rules were adopted after the Velvet Revolution in early 1990s, Slovak competition law has undergone several changes. Three acts on economic competition were subsequently adopted (in 1991, 1994, 2001), each of them several times amended. Although Slovakia became a member of the EU in 2004, the convergence of national competition rules with the law of the European Union is evident in the significant changes that were introduced in 2004. The evolution of Slovak competition rules cannot be considered finished – major amendments are expected in 2014. The following paper will analyze in which aspects Slovak competition law is diverging from the rules of the European Union. Court jurisprudence reviewing administrative decisions issued in competition matters is also important in the assessment of the competition law environment. The paper will provide an overview of those features of Slovak competition law that shall be harmonised, as well as reasons for their harmonisations. Yet it must be stressed that European law is not the universal model of convergence and hence the paper will provide thoughts on which features of Slovak competition law might remain country-specific.
Depuis l'époque où les premières règles de concurrence ont été adoptées après la Révolution de velours en début des années 1990, le droit slovaque de la concurrence a subi plusieurs changements: trois actes sur la concurrence économique ont été adoptés par la suite (1991, 1994, 2001); chacun d'entre eux a également été modifié à plusieurs reprises. Bien que la Slovaquie soit devenue membre de l'UE en 2004, la convergence du droit slovaque de la concurrence vers des règles européennes de concurrence est évidente et des changements importants ont été introduits en 2004. Les modifications de la législation slovaque en matière de la concurrence ne peuvent pas être considérées comme terminées – les modifications considérables sont attendues en 2014. Le présent article analysera dans quels aspects le droit slovaque de la concurrence est divergent. De plus, la jurisprudence des tribunaux, examinant les cas en matière de la concurrence, est importante dans l'évaluation de l'environnement de la réglementation de la concurrence. Cet article offre un aperçu des caractéristiques du droit slovaque de la concurrence qui doit être harmonisé, ainsi que les raisons pour ces harmonisations. D'autre part, il faut souligner que le droit européen n'est pas le modèle universel de convergence et donc l’article présentera des pensées sur lesquelles les caractéristiques du droit national de la concurrence pourraient rester spécifique.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2014, 7(9); 109-123
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Directive on Antitrust Damages Actions and Current Changes of Slovak Competition and Civil Law
Autorzy:
Blazo, Ondrej
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530357.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
competition law
Directive 2014/104/EU
Slovakia
civil law
commercial law
reform of competition law
leniency programme
settlement
procedural law
Opis:
Slovak competition law enforcement can be characterized by infrequency of leniency applications and near absence of private enforcement. As a result, the adoption of the Damages Directive is not likely to cause substantial breakthrough in Slovakia, be it with respect to the rate of leniency applications or in private enforcement. A comprehensive amendment of Slovak competition law took place in 2014. Changes introduced therein reflected, among other things, the practice of the European Commission regarding access to its file. A new approach was also introduced towards damages claims submitted against leniency applicants. The paper will first consider the question whether it is necessary to further redesign these new Slovak rules because of the adoption of the Damages Directive, or if they have been successfully pre-harmonized. Along with changes to Slovak competition law, procedural rules for civil courts were also re-codified. Hence the second part of this analysis will focus on the question if a new civil procedure framework, including obligatory harmonization, could foster private enforcement of competition law. Summarizing the resulting answers, the third question focuses on who could benefit from further changes to Slovak legislation – final consumers or enterprises that are involved in the production chain. Finally, will changes in Slovak legislation driven by the Directive be coherent with its overall legal system, or will they appear to be an odd and peculiar piece of legislation?
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(12); 259-272
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Institutional Challenges for Private Enforcement of Competition Law in Central and Eastern European Member States of the EU
Autorzy:
Blazo, Ondrej
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530185.pdf
Data publikacji:
2017-06-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
judicial system
judicial specialization
competition law
damages
harmonization
EU law
Opis:
The paper will focus on requirements and thresholds set for the judiciary by the Damages Directive. Answered will also be questions on the specialization of courts and its application in Central and Eastern European (CEE) Member States of the EU, as well as on the involvement of national competition authorities (NCAs) in court proceedings. The paper provides also general thoughts regarding the specialization of courts and confronts them with the judiciary structure in CEE Member States in the context of private enforcement of competition law. While there is no uniform model of a judicial system, the paper provides a critical analysis of the centralization, specialization and decentralization of private enforcement models, taking into account also the importance of the training of judges. The relationship between NCAs and courts will be discussed whereby the role of NCAs in private enforcement defines the responsibility of the given public authority in private enforcement as a country’s policymaker.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2017, 10(15); 31-48
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
What Do Limitation Periods for Sanctions in Antitrust Matters Really Limit?
Autorzy:
Blažo, Ondrej
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530322.pdf
Data publikacji:
2011-11-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
competition law
antitrust procedure
sanctions
administrative responsibility
Slovakia
EU law
limitation period
criminal law
private enforcement
legal certainty
safeguards
powers of competition authority
European Commission
Opis:
Limitation periods represent a legal safeguard for a person who has once broken the law in order not to be put at risk of sanctions and other legal liabilities for an indefinite amount of time. By contrast, public interest can sometimes require that a person who has committed a serious breach of law cannot benefit from limitation periods and that it is necessary to declare that the law had indeed been infringed and that legal liability shall be expected irrespective of the passage of time. This article aims to answer the question whether limitation periods for sanctions attached to competition restricting practices by Slovak competition law also limit the powers of its competition authority to declare the illegality of illicit behaviour or to prohibit it. Although this question can arise, and has done so already, as a defence in antitrust proceedings, as well as the fact that an answer to this question can potentially, as well as actually, affect rights of undertakings which have broken competition rules, Slovak jurisprudence cannot be seen as explicit in answering this question.
Les délais de prescription représentent une garantie juridique pour éviter que celui qui a violé la loi soit pour toujours exposé à la contrainte d’une sanction ou d’un autre type de responsabilté juridique. Toutefois, dans certains cas, il est dans l’intérêt public que la personne qui a gravement enfreint la loi ne puisse pas bénéficier du délai de prescription et qu’il soit possible de constater la violation du droit et d’engager la responsabilité juridique. Le présent article essaie de répondre à la question fondamentale, celle de savoir si les délais de prescription prévus, dans le droit slovaque actuel, pour infliger des sanctions pour accords limitant la concurrence ou pour abus de position dominante sont, également, en situation de limiter la compétence de l’autorité slovaque de la concurrence de constater l’illégalité d’une démarche d’une entreprise ou sa compétence d’interdire une telle démarche. Même si cette question peut être posée, ou a déjà été posée, en défense contre les démarches anti-cartel et la réponse à la question peut, potentiellement mais aussi réellement, avoir une influence sur les droits de l’entreprise qui a violé les règles de concurrence, la jurisprudence slovaque donne une réponse claire à cette question.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2012, 5(7); 79-103
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-4 z 4

    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