IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/recjxx/v16y2020i2-3p613-627.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

EU Competition law and extraterritorial jurisdiction – a critical analysis of the ECJ's judgement in Intel

Author

Listed:
  • Bernadette Zelger

Abstract

The focus of this piece lies with extraterritorial jurisdiction in the context of the application of the EU competition provisions. Whereas the doctrine of effects has been established in the context of US antitrust law more than 50 years ago, it has not been until recently that the ECJ confirmed such an approach for the establishment of the jurisdiction of the EU competition provisions in its judgement in Intel. However, the latter decision has not been without criticism, as the ECJ put together different sets of abusive conduct and assessed Intel's behaviour in its entirety. For that reason, also conduct with an arguably very tenuous link to the EU/EEA, that is, behaviour between Intel in the US and Lenovo in China was considered in the Court's judgement. Hence, this article aims to critically analyse the ECJ's decision, also taking into account the first-instance ruling of the General Court as well as the AG opinion. It will conclude that considering other concepts developed in the context of the competition provisions, the ECJ's reasoning seems sound. Furthermore, the adoption of the qualified effects test seems also welcome in order to meet the challenges imposed by our global economy and digital markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernadette Zelger, 2020. "EU Competition law and extraterritorial jurisdiction – a critical analysis of the ECJ's judgement in Intel," European Competition Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2-3), pages 613-627, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:recjxx:v:16:y:2020:i:2-3:p:613-627
    DOI: 10.1080/17441056.2020.1840844
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17441056.2020.1840844
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17441056.2020.1840844?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:recjxx:v:16:y:2020:i:2-3:p:613-627. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/recj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.