Informacja

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

Wyszukujesz frazę "antitrust" wg kryterium: Temat


Tytuł:
2008 and 2009 EU Competition Law and Sector-specific Regulatory Case Law Developments with a Nexus to Poland
Autorzy:
Kośka, Dagmara
Kuik, Krzysztof
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530025.pdf
Data publikacji:
2010-12-01
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
Access Directive
active ingredient
airline industry
antitrust
bankruptcy
broadband
collective management
competition law
copyright
divestiture
e-communications
economic crisis
electronic communications
EU competition law
European Commission
fine
Framework Directive
full-function joint venture
insurance
interconnection
interim measures
liquidation
merger
national regulatory authority
NRA
patent
performing right
pharmaceutical industry
pharmaceutical sector inquiry
Polish Law on telecommunications
Polish shipyards
recovery decision
recovery of the aid
regional aid
remedies
reproduction right
restructuring aid
State aid
subscriber
Opis:
The 2008 issue of YARS contained an overview of EU law developments in the period of time from 2004 to 2007. This overview covers the years 2008-2009. It confirms that State aid cases remained numerous (6 in total) and that the Commission’s enforcement activities in the area of State aid control continued at a similar pace as before. With respect to other areas of competition law and policy, the overall picture shows a relatively high level of scrutiny in mergers (5) and antitrust cases or inquiries (2). Moreover, EU Courts adopted several decisions in Polish cases, notably in the regulatory field (electronic communications) and State aid control (partial annulment in Huta Częstochowa (Operator) as well as the rejection of a request for interim measures in Technologie Buczek). The regulatory court cases show the Commission’s consistency in pursuing Member States in their failure to implement or to correctly implement the EU Electronic Communications package. In the state aid related Huta Częstochowa (Operator) judgement, the General Court (GC, formerly the Court of First Instance, CFI) partially annulled the scrutinised Commission decision since the Commission failed to identify the actual benefit related to the receipt of the aid in question. The jury is still out in the case concerning Technologie Buczek because the interim measures judgement says little about the potential outcome of the pending main appeals.
Le YARS de 2008 contenait un aperçu des développements du droit de l'UE pendant la période de 2004 à 2007, alors que celui-ci couvre les années 2008-2009. Il confirme que les cas d'aides d'État sont restés nombreux (6 au total) et que la mise en œuvre du contrôle des aides d'État par la Commission a continué au même rythme. En ce qui concerne les autres secteurs du droit de la concurrence et de la politique de concurrence, le nombre de contrôles des concentrations et des cas ou des enquêtes antitrust est relativement élevé (2). En outre, les cours de l'UE ont rendu plusieurs arrêts dans des cas polonais, notamment dans le domaine réglementaire (communications électroniques) et du contrôle d'aides d'État (l'annulation partielle dans Huta Częstochowa (opérateur) ainsi que le rejet d'une demande de mesures provisoires dans Technologie Buczek). Les arrêts dans le domaine réglementaire montrent la cohérence de la Commission dans les actions contre les États membres qui ont manqué à leur obligation de mettre en oeuvre, ou de mettre en œuvre correctement, le Paquet Télécom de l'UE. Dans l'arrêt Huta Częstochowa (opérateur) concernant les aides d'État, le Tribunal (précédemment le Tribunal de Première Instance, TPI) a partiellement annulé la décision de la Commission puisque la Commission n'a pas réussi à identifier l'avantage réel de la réception de l'aide en question. Le jury est toujours en train de délibérer dans le cas concernant Technologie Buczek parce que l'arrêt sur les mesures provisoires dit peu sur les résultats potentiels des appels principaux en cours.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2010, 3(3); 179-211
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
2010 and 2011 EU Competition Law and Sector-specific Regulatory Jurisprudence and Case Law Developments with a Nexus to Poland
Autorzy:
Mościbroda, Anna
Kuik, Krzysztof
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530365.pdf
Data publikacji:
2012-11-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
telecommunication
pharmaceuticals
antitrust
cartel
competition law
Commission decision
state aid
merger control
case law
regulatory cases
infringement
preliminary ruling
Electronic Communications Framework
broadband
alternative operators
powers of NCA
Regulation 1/2003
modernisation
procedural autonomy
number portability
conditional approval
general prohibition of combined sales
publication requirements
Act of Accession
internet tariffs
Universal Service Directive
Framework Directive
retail broadband tariffs
generic products
marketing authorisations
Opis:
This third overview of EU competition and sector-specific regulatory jurisprudential and case law developments with a nexus to Poland covers the years 2010 and 2011. This period of time is worth noting for several reasons. First, EU courts delivered a significant number of judgments in ‘Polish’ cases including an increased number of preliminary rulings. Second, 2010-2011 developments were dominated by judgments and decisions concerning telecoms. Finally, the Commission adopted only a handful of Polish State aid decisions following a formal investigation procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU. The main developments in telecoms relate to the Court of Justice's preliminary reference judgment in Tele 2 Polska focusing on the interpretation of Regulation 1/2003 and the PTC v UKE ruling that dealt with number portability charges. Relevant is also the antitrust prohibition decision issued by the Commission against Telekomunikacja Polska S.A. for its refusal to grant access to its wholesale broadband services. In other fields, the Court of Justice delivered three State aid judgments (including two appeals against pre-2010 judgments of the General Court) and two judgments in infringement proceedings (regarding pre EU Accession marketing authorisations for medicines and the reutilisation of data from the public sector). The General Court ruled on appeal in the butadiene rubber cartel case (e.g. in Trade-Stomil v Commission). Finally, the Commission dealt with a merger case with a truly Polish specificity (Kraft Foods/ Cadbury), approved subject to divestiture of the E. Wedel brand.
Ce troisième aperçu portant sur les développements de la réglementation relative au droit de la concurrence de l’UE et droit séctoriel, ainsi qu’à la jurisprudence ayant un lien imporatnt avec la Pologne, couvre les années 2010 et 2011. Cette période vaut l’intérêt pour plusieurs raisons. Premièrement, les tribunaux de l'UE ont délivré un nombre important d'arrêts dans les cas « polonais » dont un nombre croissant de questions préjudicielles. Deuxièmement, les développements en 2010-2011 ont été dominés par les jugements et décisions concernant les télécommunications (télécoms). Enfin, la Commission n’a adopté qu’un petit nombre de décisions sur les aides de l’État polonais à la suite d'une procédure formelle d'examen conformément à l'article 108 (2) du TFUE. Les développements principaux dans les télécoms se rapportent au renvoi préjudiciel de la Cour de justice dans le cas Tele 2 Polska portant sur l'interprétation du règlement 1/2003 et celui relatif au cas UKE v PTC sur les frais de portabilité des numéros. La décision concernant une infraction en application adoptée par la Commission contre Telekomunikacja Polska SA pour son refus d'accorder l'accès à ses services de gros de la large bande est également pertinente. Dans les autres domaines, la CJCE a rendu trois arrêts sur les aides d'État (deux recours contre les arrêts rendus par le Tribunal de première instance avant 2010) et deux arrêts dans une procédure d'infraction (en ce qui concerne les autorisations de marketing pour la médecine préalables à l'adhésion à l’UE et la réutilisation des données du secteur public). Le Tribunal de première instance a statué sur le recours dans le cas de cartel caoutchouc butadiène (par exemple le cas Trade-Stomil v Commission). Enfin, la Commission a traité un cas de fusion avec une spécificité typiquement polonaise (Kraft Foods / Cadbury), approuvé assujetti à la cession de la marque E. Wedel.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2012, 5(7); 157-190
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
2016 Amendment of the Czech Significant Market Power Act of 2009
Autorzy:
Frischmann, Petr
Šmejkal, Vaclav
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530111.pdf
Data publikacji:
2016-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
significant market power
retail chains
protection of suppliers
antitrust
Opis:
The Significant Market Power Act (SMPA) adopted in 2009 regulates the assessment of, and the prevention of, the abuse of market power in the sale of agricultural and food products. The Act generated many controversies from the outset, survived legislative proposals for its abolition, to be finally amended in 2016. However, this kind of legislation failed to solve most of the problems and even managed to create additional controversies. The new amendment formally simplified the actual wording of the SMPA by transposing its numerous earlier appendixes, which contained an exemplary list of prohibited forms of SMP abuse, to the actual text of the Act. It also improved transparency and clarity with respect to its earlier vague and ambiguous terminology. At the same time, the amendment seriously modified the scope and principal philosophy of the SMPA by removing the previously required “substantial detriment to economic competition” as the pre-condition of the applicability of the Act. However, since the enforcement of the SMPA falls into the scope of the activities of the Czech Office for Protection of Economic Competition (in Czech Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže, UOHS), the concerns and doubts of the business community continue to grow whether this form of regulation is appropriate after the modification of the concept.
La Loi sur les pouvoirs de marchés significatifs (« SMPA ») adoptée en 2009 réglemente l'évaluation et la prévention de l'abus de pouvoir de marché dans la vente de produits agricoles et alimentaires. Cette loi a provoqué de nombreuses controverses dès le début, a survécu les propositions législatives pour son abolition pour être finalement modifiée en 2016. Cependant, cette législation non seulement n'a pas réussi à résoudre la plupart des problèmes, mais a provoqué des controverses supplémentaires. Le nouvel amendement a simplifié le language du « SMPA » par la transposition de ses nombreuses annexes antérieures, qui ont contenu la liste exemplaire des abus interdites de « SMPA » au texte de la Loi. Il a également amélioré la transparence et la clarté par rapport à la terminologie vague et ambiguë antérieure du « SMPA ». En même temps, l'amendement a modifié sérieusement la portée et la philosophie principale du « SMPA » par la suppression de notion de « préjudice substantiel à la concurrence économique » qui a constitué précédemment une condition préalable de l’application de la Loi. Toutefois, vue que l'application du “SMPA” entre dans le cadre des compétences de l’Autorité de la concurrence tchèque (en tchèque : Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže, UOHS), les préoccupations et les doutes du business si cette réglementation est appropriée après la modification du concept continuent à monter.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2016, 9(14); 227-246
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
A Maintenance of a Dominant Market Position – on the Example of the Polish Post Office
Autorzy:
Bernat, Tomasz
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/517423.pdf
Data publikacji:
2014
Wydawca:
Instytut Badań Gospodarczych
Tematy:
dominant position
antitrust law
maintenance of dominant position
allocative inefficiency
Opis:
The system changes of the Polish economy, which began in the 80s of the 20th century and were continued after the accession to the European Union in 2004, have caused significant transformations, not only in the economy and ownership relations, but also in single markets. What is more, some of the European Commission’s guidelines have introduced the market regulations which were dominated by natural monopolies. These changes were to cause the competitiveness on the market and to improve its functioning in an efficiency allocative sense in order to make the consumers’ situation better. However, it is often a kind of struggle without any visible effects in short or long term. One of such examples is the Polish Post Office as the national operator in the market of postal services. The scientific objective of this study is to answer the question whether the changes in the law regulating the postal market cause real changes in the market structure, resulting in a reduction in allocative inefficiency? The working hypothesis referring to such research problem is formulated as follows: large business entities operating in the monopolistic market structure until now use all of the tools – including changes in the law, to maintain their position. It causes an increase in allocative inefficiency of companies and market. The object of the research is Poczta Polska SA. The primary research method will be based on the analysis of the legal rules, the analysis of the activities and entities’ decisions and the comparative analysis. The active research is supported by the literature recognition.
Źródło:
Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy; 2014, 9, 4; 9-20
1689-765X
2353-3293
Pojawia się w:
Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Access to Documents in Antitrust Litigation – EU and Croatian Perspective
Autorzy:
Butorac Malnar, Vlatka
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530371.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
EU Damages Directive
private enforcement
cartels
antitrust litigation
access to documents
access to file
evidence in antitrust litigation
Opis:
The paper analyses access to documents in cartel-based damages cases from the EU and Croatian perspective. It considers all relevant EU and Croatian legislation and case-law primarily focusing on the expected impact of the newly enacted Damages Directive. It is argued that the new rules on access to documents provided by the Directive will not necessarily have a significant impact on damages proceedings following cartel decisions issued by the Commission. This is due to the introduction of an absolute ban on the disclosure of leniency statements and settlement submissions via a ‘maximum harmonization’ rule. This conclusion is drawn from statistic figures showing that EU cartel enforcement rests solely on the leniency and settlement procedures. With that in mind, it is concluded that the Directive’s general, permissive rules on access to documents (other than leniency and settlement procedures) will not be applicable in most damages cases following the cartel infringement decision issued by the Commission. However, it is also observed that the Damages Directive’s new rules on access to documents may have the opposite impact on private enforcement in cases following infringement decisions issued by National Competition Authorities (NCAs) which do not rely as much on leniency in their fight against cartels as the Commission. The Directive’s general rule on access to documents will apply in jurisdictions such as Croatia, where all of its cartel decisions so far have been reached within the regular procedure. It is argued that the general access rule, coupled with other rules strengthening the position of claimants in antitrust damages proceedings, might actually be beneficial for both public and private enforcement in such jurisdictions.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(12); 127-160
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Algorytmy i sztuczna inteligencja jako narzędzie i źródło niedozwolonych praktyk ograniczających konkurencję w świetle art. 101 Traktatu o funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej
Algorithms and Artificial Intelligence as a Tool and Source of Prohibited Competition-Restricting Practices in the Light of Art. 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Autorzy:
Walczak, Marcin
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/30097992.pdf
Data publikacji:
2023
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Szczeciński. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego
Tematy:
algorithms
artificial intelligence
anticompetitive practices
EU antitrust law
algorytmy
sztuczna inteligencja
praktyki ograniczające konkurencję
prawo ochrony konkurencji Unii Europejskiej
Opis:
Celem artykułu jest prezentacja potencjalnych zagrożeń dla konkurencji wynikających z szerokiego zastosowania algorytmów i sztucznej inteligencji w działalności rynkowej przedsiębiorstw przez pryzmat art. 101 Traktatu o funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej1 (dalej: TFUE) oraz próba oceny, czy wskazana regulacja prawna oraz wypracowana na jej bazie praktyka wynikająca z działalności orzeczniczej Komisji Europejskiej (dalej KE) i Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej (dalej: TSUE) oraz regulacje prawa wtórnego Unii Europejskiej z zakresu konkurencji tworzą adekwatny wobec prezentowanych zagrożeń system jej ochrony. W pierwszej kolejności omówiono techniczne uwarunkowania algorytmów i sztucznej inteligencji istotne dla dalszych rozważań. Następnie, analizując art. 101 TFUE oraz wybrane orzecznictwo KE i TSUE, dokonano prezentacji i oceny prawnej prawdopodobnych praktyk zagrażających konkurencji, mogących powstać wskutek zastosowania wspomnianej technologii. W ostatniej części publikacji wskazano propozycje przeciwdziałania omówionym zagrożeniom konkurencji, opierając się na analizie wybranych aktów wtórnego prawa Unii Europejskiej z zakresu ochrony konkurencji oraz koncepcjach obrazujących przypuszczalne kierunki przyszłych rozwiązań.
The article aims to present potential perils to competition resulting from the wide use of algorithms and artificial intelligence in the market activities of firms through the prism of anticompetitive practices covered by Art. 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter: TFEU) and an attempt to assess whether the indicated legal regulation and the practice developed on its basis resulting from the jurisprudence of the European Commission (hereinafter: the EC) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter: the CJEU) and the competition regulations of the European Union’s secondary law creates an adequate protection to the presented threats. First, the technical determinants of algorithms and artificial intelligence, relevant for further considerations, were discussed. Then, by analysing Art. 101 TFEU and selected case law of the EC and the CJEU, a presentation and legal assessment of probable anticompetitive practices that may arise as a result of the use of the aforementioned technology were made. The last part of the publication indicates proposals to counteract the discussed competition threats based on an analysis of selected acts of secondary European Union competition law and concepts illustrating the possible directions of future solutions.
Źródło:
Acta Iuris Stetinensis; 2023, 43; 123-143
2083-4373
2545-3181
Pojawia się w:
Acta Iuris Stetinensis
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Anticompetitive Patent Settlements – Where Are We Ten Years After the European Commission’s Pharmaceutical Inquiry?
Autorzy:
Laszczyk, Anna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2158992.pdf
Data publikacji:
2020-09-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust law
anticompetitive agreements
patent settlements
pay-fordelay
agreements
pharmaceutical sector
Opis:
In 2009, the European Commission published a final report on its market inquiry into the pharmaceutical sector. The report revealed the authority’s concerns regarding market practices of pharmaceutical originator companies aimed at delaying the market entry of cheaper generic pharmaceutical products. One of the delaying practices identified by the European Commission were patent settlements between an originator and a generic company including: (i) a value transfer from the originator to a generic company, and (ii) an obligation of a generic company not to enter the market. These patent settlements were called pay-for-delay agreements since the payment was allegedly made in exchange for the non-mark-entry obligation. The European Commission continued the investigation of patent settlements by its continuous monitoring. It also initiated antitrust proceedings that terminated with huge fines imposed on pharmaceutical companies. The appeals are now pending before the EU courts. Ten years after the publication of the final report on the market inquiry, this article aims to summarize the development of the case law and provide its critical analysis. The article focuses on the analysis of pay-for-delay agreements as infringements of Article 101 TFEU only and does not consider the conclusion of these agreements as an abuse of a dominant position.
En 2009, la Commission européenne a publié un rapport final sur son enquête de marché concernant le secteur pharmaceutique. Le rapport a révélé les préoccupations de la Commission concernant les pratiques de marché des laboratoires pharmaceutiques visant à retarder l’entrée sur le marché de produits pharmaceutiques génériques moins chers. L’une des pratiques retardatrices identifies par la Commission européenne était les règlements de brevet entre un laboratoire et un fabricant de produits génériques, notamment : (i) un transfert de valeur du laboratoire de vers un fabricant de génériques, et (ii) l’obligation pour un fabricant de génériques de ne pas entrer sur le marché. Ces accords de brevet étaient qualifies d’accords de paiement pour retard, puisque le paiement était apparemment effectué en échange de l’obligation de ne pas entrer sur le marché. La Commission européenne a poursuivi l’enquête sur les accords de brevet en exerçant une surveillance continue. Elle a également lancé des procédures antitrust qui se sont terminées par l’imposition d’amendes considérables aux sociétés pharmaceutiques. Les recours sont maintenant en cours devant les tribunaux de l’UE. Dix ans après la publication du rapport final sur l’enquête de marché, cet article vise à résumer l’évolution de la jurisprudence et à fournir une analyse critique. L’article se concentre sur l’analyse des accords de paiement des retards en tant qu’infractions à l’article 101 du TFUE uniquement et ne considère pas la conclusion de ces accords comme un abus de position dominante.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2020, 13, 21; 129-160
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Antitrust and Copyright Collectives – an Economic Analysis
Autorzy:
Zabłocka, Adrianna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530183.pdf
Data publikacji:
2008-12-01
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
collecting societies
copyright
antitrust
transaction costs
welfare
Opis:
The activity of the copyright collecting societies had been scrutinized by many antitrust authorities. The paper presents the decision taken by the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK), which deals with abusing practices of Polish copyright collective society – ZAiKS. The paper concentrates on the economic aspects of the decision from the President of UOKiK.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2008, 1(1); 152-165
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Antitrust Damages Actions in Ukraine: Current Situation and Perspectives
Autorzy:
Gerasymenko, Anzhelika
Mazaraki, Nataliia
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530348.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust damages actions
private antitrust enforcement
harm from antitrust infringement
non-infringement scenario
economic effect of cease of antitrust infringements
welfare loss from market power
Opis:
The article gives an overview of Ukrainian legislation and experiences concerning antitrust damages actions. The analysis has led to a number of conclusions: private claims are rare in Ukraine due to difficulties in obtaining evidence, high legal costs, and lacking confidence in the Ukrainian court system. The paper gives examples of Ukrainian private antitrust enforcement practice and provides a statistical analysis of the dynamics of ‘compensated’ damages caused by antitrust infringements in Ukraine. The value of ‘compensated’ damages is compared to the value of the economic effect of stopping antitrust infringements, as well as to the value of the overall welfare loss deriving from market power in the national economy. Finally, some new sources of damages caused by market power are discussed considering the development perspectives of this branch of antitrust activity.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2015, 8(12); 195-214
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Antitrust liability in the context of online platforms. Case comment to the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of 21 January 2016 ‘Eturas’ UAB v Lietuvos Respublikos konkurencijos taryba (Case C-74/14)
Autorzy:
Targański, Bartosz
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530294.pdf
Data publikacji:
2016-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust
coordination
e-commerce
online platforms
compliance
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2016, 9(14); 293-298
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
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:
Antykonkurencyjne innowacje – oksymoron czy realne wyzwanie prawa antymonopolowego?
Anticompetitive innovations – oxymoron or a real challenge for antitrust law?
Autorzy:
Molski, Rajmund
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/927223.pdf
Data publikacji:
2019-12-04
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
Tematy:
anticompetitive innovations
unilateral conduct restricting competition
antitrust law
Opis:
One of the overriding principles of modern economic policy is promotion of innovation. It also turns out, however, that innovations may work against competition, thus becoming a major challenge for antitrust law. The importance and the degree of diffi culty surrounding this challenge as well as some controversies related to it can be evidenced by the antitrust enforcement policy referring to innovations. This policy has thus far been highly enigmatic and labile. It seems that no consensus can be reached on the relation between competition and innovations as much as it cannot be achieved on the validity of including the latter in the antitrust enforcement regime, particularly when it comes to applying the prohibition of the abuse of a dominant position. While it is true that innovations compound the risk of antitrust errors, especially those consisting in de-legalisation of innovations which are not anticompetitive, it would nevertheless be wrong to underestimate, and even more so to ignore, the risk of errors amounting to an unjustifi ed tolerance of anticompetitive innovations and an overstated belief in the self-regulatory ability of the market. In any case, considering the priority objective of the economic policy which should be to support and promote innovations, as well as taking into account that the goal of antitrust law is not only to settle real confl icts arising between innovations and the protection of competition, but also to provide for an innovation-friendly environment, the antitrust intervention into innovations should be sensible, farsighted and predictable. Otherwise, antitrust law may become a burden for the actual and potential innovators – like the mythical sword above the head of Damocles.
Źródło:
Studia Prawa Publicznego; 2017, 2 (18); 9-41
2300-3936
Pojawia się w:
Studia Prawa Publicznego
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Arbitration Agreements and Actions for Antitrust Damages After the CDC Hydrogen Peroxide Judgment
Autorzy:
Sadrak, Katarzyna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/530165.pdf
Data publikacji:
2017-12-31
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
arbitrability
arbitration
arbitration agreement
antitrust
competition law
damages
unfair competition
Opis:
On May 21st 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union in CDC Hydrogen Peroxide decided whether the application of jurisdiction clauses in actions for damages impedes the effective enforcement of EU competition law. The CJ stayed silent, however, on how to treat arbitration clauses, which similarly to jurisdiction clauses, exclude a default court jurisdiction. The question of how to interpret arbitration agreements in the event of an antitrust violation and subsequent actions for damages remains thus unanswered. In light of the foreseen increase in private enforcement of EU competition law, this problem gains significance. This is because arbitration agreements may be frequently used to govern commercial relationships between antitrust infringers and their injured direct contractors. Against this background, the paper aims to analyse the consequences brought about by the existence of arbitration clauses in the event of actions for antitrust damages. It seeks to answer two questions: whether the claims for antitrust damages can be per se arbitrated, and whether the general arbitration clauses used by the parties to regulate their commercial relations cover the actions for antitrust damages. In order to address these problems, the papers draws attention to the CJ’s interpretation of jurisdiction clauses and the Polish experience of interpreting the scope of arbitration agreements in the field of unfair competition law. The paper reaches the conclusion that neither the arbitration nor EU law prevent arbitrating actions for antitrust damages. Whether a specific arbitration agreement covers actions for antitrust damages or not can be analyzed only with reference to the will of the parties interpreted under applicable national law. It is believed, however, that there are many reasons to adopt an arbitration-friendly interpretation of vague arbitration agreements.
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2017, 10(16); 77-106
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Arbitraż a prawo konkurencji – głos w dyskusji (artykuł polemiczny)
Arbitration and competition law – some input into the dispute (A polemic)
Autorzy:
Bagdziński, Tomasz
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/508575.pdf
Data publikacji:
2015-06-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
arbitraż
prawo konkurencji
prawo antymonopolowe
arbitration
competition law
antitrust
Opis:
Artykuł jest głosem w dyskusji dotyczącej możliwości rozstrzygania sporów z zakresu prawa konkurencji za pomocą arbitrażu. Stanowi polemikę z artykułem autorstwa Piotra Nowaczyka i Szymona Sypa, którzy opowiedzieli się za możliwością rozstrzygania sporów z zakresu prawa konkurencji w drodze arbitrażu. Autor przedstawia argumenty dotyczące publicznoprawnego charakteru regulacji, jaką jest prawo konkurencji i skutków z tego wynikających, w szczególności w zakresie celów realizowanych regulacjami oraz kontroli nad orzecznictwem z tego zakresu, a także trudności z potencjalną egzekucją rozstrzygnięć zapadłych w arbitrażu.
This article is a voice in the discussion whether a competition law dispute may be resolved by way of arbitration. It constitutes a polemic response to an earlier article written by Piotr Nowaczyk and Szymon Syp who argue in favour of such a solution. By contrast, the author of this paper stresses the public-law character of competition law and the resulting repercussions, especially with respect to the goals of competition law and judicial control over its enforcement. The author notes also the potential difficulties with the execution of verdicts reached in arbitration.
Źródło:
internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny; 2015, 4, 4; 69-74
2299-5749
Pojawia się w:
internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Can an Ideal Court Model in Private Antitrust Enforcement Be Established?
Autorzy:
Wolski, Dominik
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/529927.pdf
Data publikacji:
2018-12-30
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Wydziału Zarządzania
Tematy:
antitrust private enforcement
specialized
quasi-specialized and non-specialized courts
antitrust litigations
judges
jury
judicial review
Opis:
Any discussion of private antitrust enforcement usually focuses on substantive law and proceedings applicable to private antitrust cases. Those elements are important, however, the efficacy of both public and private enforcement relies upon rules of law (substantive and procedural) along with their application. The latter constitutes a substantial aspect affecting the institutions which make decisions in private antitrust enforcement cases, namely the relevant courts. The enforcement of competition law is inextricably intertwined with the economy and markets. As a result, antitrust cases are demanding for non-specialist judges, who usually do not have enough knowledge and experience in the field of competition. Even if the Damages Directive has already been implemented in all EU Member States, there is still room for discussion about developing an optimal court model for the adjudication of private antitrust enforcement cases. In the aforementioned discussion the issue of the binding effect of decisions made by the European Commission (EC) and National Competition Authorities (NCAs) in private enforcement cases, as well as the experience of judges stemming from the number of cases they have resolved, cannot be missed. Bearing this in mind, the main aim of this paper is to analyse the model of competent courts operating in private antitrust cases in twenty selected countries including the US, the UK and the vast majority of EU Member States. Taking into account that a theoretically pure concept of an ideal model of relevant court operations presumably does not exist, it is essential to try to figure out what the main characteristics of the courts might be that can lead to effective private antitrust enforcement.
Toute discussion sur l’application privée du droit de la concurrence se concentre habituellement sur le droit matériel et sur les procédures applicables aux affaires antitrust privées. Ces éléments sont importants, cependant, l’efficacité de l’application publique et privée repose sur des règles de droit (matériel et procédural) ainsi que leur application. Ce dernier constitue un aspect important affectant les institutions qui prennent des décisions dans les cas d’application des lois antitrust privées, qui sont les tribunaux compétents. L’application du droit de la concurrence est inextricablement liée à l’économie et aux marchés. En conséquence, les affaires antitrust exigent des juges non spécialisés, qui n’ont généralement pas suffisamment de connaissances et d’expérience dans le domaine de la concurrence. Même si la directive ‘dommages-intérêts’ a été mise en œuvre dans tous les États membres de l’Union européenne, il reste encore des discussions sur la mise au point d’un modèle judiciaire optimal pour le règlement des affaires d’antitrust privées. Dans la discussion susmentionnée, la question de l’effet contraignant des décisions prises par la Commission européenne et par les autorités nationales de la concurrence dans les affaires privées, ainsi que l’expérience des juges découlant du nombre d’affaires résolues, ne peuvent manquer. Dans cet esprit, l’objectif principal de cet article est d’analyser le modèle des tribunaux compétents opérant dans les affaires antitrust privées dans vingt pays sélectionnés, y compris les États-Unis, le Royaume-Uni et la grande majorité des États membres. Puisqu’un concept théoriquement pur de modèle idéal d’activités judiciaires pertinentes n’existe pas, il est essentiel de tenter de déterminer quelles pourraient être les caractéristiques principales des tribunaux susceptibles de conduire à une application efficace des lois antitrust dans les affaires privées
Źródło:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies; 2018, 11(18); 115-152
1689-9024
2545-0115
Pojawia się w:
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł

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