Alternative Enforcement of Competition Law: Balancing Legal Requirements in Practice

The article is devoted to the analysis of the draft law "On Protection of Competition", which must substitute the laws "On Competition and Limitation of Monopolistic Activity on Commodity Markets" and "On Protection of Competition on the Financial Services Market". The innovations enhancing the quality of Russian competition law and new norms providing at least ambiguous effects on antimonopoly regulation are considered. The first group of positive measures includes unification of competition norms for commodity and financial markets, changes of criteria and the scale of control of economic concentrations, specification of conditions, where norms are applied "per se" and according to the "rule of reason", introduction of rules that can prevent the restriction of competition by the executive power. The interpretation of the "collective dominance" concept and certain rules devoted to antimonopoly control of state aid are in the second group of questionable steps.

Download Full-text

Consistent application of EU and domestic competition law: the UK experience

Zeitschrift für Wettbewerbsrecht ◽

10.15375/zwer-2009-0402 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 7 (4) ◽

pp. 427-436

Author(s):

Aidan Robertson

Keyword(s):

Competition Law ◽

The Uk ◽

Consistent Application

Download Full-text

“Collective Redress” in European Competition Law

Zeitschrift für Wettbewerbsrecht ◽

10.15375/zwer-2016-0407 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 14 (4) ◽

pp. 388-414

Author(s):

Alexandra P. Mikroulea

Keyword(s):

Hybrid System ◽

Competition Law ◽

Mixed System ◽

Basic Question ◽

Effective Implementation ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

Collective Redress ◽

Opt Out ◽

Private Autonomy ◽

European Competition Law

AbstractOpt-in or opt-out? That is the basic question to be answered. The decision to promote actions of “opt-in” type as opposed to those of the “opt-out” type, for the sake of private autonomy, does not ensure the effective application of european competition law. On the contrary, it may decrease the application’s intensity and effectiveness. Recent reforms among European state members such as in the United Kingdom, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway are powerful indications that the opt-out principle may result in the effective implementation of competition law. There is no doubt that a mixed system (hybrid system), providing the court with the power to decide in favour of either the opt-in or the opt-out system, will result in better implementation of competition law. At the present time there are two pending cases in England (Dorothy Gibson and Mastercard) for which the decision on opt-out or opt-in are highly anticipated. Should the court decide, in one or both of the cases, on an opt-out approach, this will bring a momentous reevaluation of the entire collective redress concept.

Download Full-text