Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

European Commission Opinions to National Courts in Antitrust Cases: Consistent Application and the Judicial-Administrative Relationship

Contents:

Author Info

  • Kathryn Wright

    ()
    (Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    The House of Lords judgment in Inntrepreneur v Crehan, where the court did not consider itself bound by a finding of the European Commission, demonstrated the potentially contentious and constitutionally significant nature of the relationship between the European Commission and national judges in the field of antitrust. The decentralisation of enforcement of Articles 81 and 82EC arguably carries greater risks of divergent application of EC antitrust enforcement rules. While national competition authorities are linked through the European Competition Network, no such mechanism exists for national courts as this would offend against the principles of judicial independence and procedural autonomy. The Commission, as primary enforcer of competition law in the Community, has therefore attempted to complement the formal judicial 'dialogue' of the European Court of Justice's preliminary reference procedure with a strengthening of its own relations with the national courts. After addressing the broader theoretical context of administrative intervention in judicial decision-making, this paper examines the use of one tool to promote consistent application of EC antitrust rules - non-binding European Commission opinions and amicus curiae briefs to national courts in antitrust proceedings under Article 15 of the Modernisation Regulation. It identifies national cases where the Commission has actually intervened under Article 15 and assesses the nature and efficacy of this soft law mechanism. One finding is the difficulty in finding and tracing the cases, making the impact of the Commission’s advice difficult to judge. Transparency is desirable for legitimacy, legal certainty, and if Commission opinions are to have the most impact for promoting convergent application of EC antitrust rules among national judges.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.ccp.uea.ac.uk/publicfiles/workingpapers/CCP08-24.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia in its series Working Papers with number 08-24.

    as in new window
    Length: 57 pages
    Date of creation: Jul 2008
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:ccp:wpaper:wp08-24

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Norwich, NR4 7TJ
    Phone: +44(0)1603 593715
    Fax: +44(0)1603 591622
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.ccp.uea.ac.uk
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: European Commission; national courts; amicus curiae; Modernisation Regulation; public and private competition enforcement;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ccp:wpaper:wp08-24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Cheryl Whittkaer) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Cheryl Whittkaer to update the entry or send us the correct address.

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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