Increasing Use of 'Negotiated' Instruments of European Competition Law Enforcement Towards Foreign Companies

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewelina Sage
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Foreign Companies ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
European Competition Law

Use of Investor–state against China’s Enforcement of the Anti-Monopoly Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 489-503
Author(s):  
Sungjin Kang
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Foreign Investors ◽  
Foreign Companies ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Fair And Equitable Treatment ◽  
Trading Partners ◽  
Competition Laws ◽  
Equitable Treatment

Since China introduced the Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) in 2008, China achieved an impressive competition law enforcement field record. However, lawyers and scholars still argue that Chinese competition authorities applied AML disproportionately against foreign companies. Despite the possibility of judicial reviews, many foreign companies still have reservation on the independent of judiciary of China, and they are still reluctant to appeal the decisions before the Chinese courts. In addition, there are some incidents where Chinese competition authorities used the AML to promote its own industrial policy. In this regard, foreign companies are not 100 per cent sure to trust the decisions of the Chinese competition authorities that they apply the AML fairly to safeguard the fair competition between Chinese companies and foreign companies. In this regard, foreign investors are trying to find a system to make sure that they are subject to ‘fair and equitable’ treatment or at least to ‘national treatment’ under the trade agreements between China and its major trading partners. The author is of the view that it is time for the foreign investors in China to consider the ISDS as an option to challenge procedural aspects of the Chinese competition law enforcements. By bringing an AML cases before the ISDS, foreign investors may induce Chinese competition authorities to comply with the due process and fair application of the competition laws, thus safeguarding transparency and predictability of the competition law enforcement of China.

European Union competition law in the digital era

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimiliano Kadar
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Competition Policy ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Digital Era ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Specific Regulation ◽  
European Competition Law ◽  
Union Competition

AbstractWhat is the role of European competition policy in the digital economy? Even if it cannot deal with all perceived issues in digital markets, competition law enforcement is the appropriate tool to remedy distortions to competition caused by market power, without the introduction of pervasive ex-ante sector-specific regulation being required. Whilst some of the proposals for reform of the European competition law legal framework recently brought may have some merit in principle, the current regime appears to be suitable and sufficiently flexible to allow the Commission to intervene effectively and remedy competitive distortions in digital markets.

A Solution to the Problems? Regulation 1/2003 and the modernization of competition procedure

2003 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Montag ◽  
Andreas Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Radical Reform ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Ec Competition Law

Abstract On 16th December 2002 the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No. 1/2003 on the implementation of rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty. This Regulation will not only replace the 40-year-old Regulation 17/ 62 but constitutes a radical reform of EC competition law enforcement. The purpose of this article is to analyse the basic principles of the new Regulation and the implications for current and future competition proceedings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document