The Legal Professional Privilege in Competition Law Cases – A Key Element in Protecting the Proper Administration of Justice

Helene Andersson
{"title":"The Legal Professional Privilege in Competition Law Cases – A Key Element in Protecting the Proper Administration of Justice","authors":"Helene Andersson","doi":"10.36969/njel.v7i2.26397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The legal professional privilege is an important principle underpinning the EU judicial system as it ensures the proper administration of justice, procedural efficiency and protects fundamental rights such as a client’s defence rights and the right to privacy enshrined in Articles 47 and 7 of the Charter. In competition cases, the European Commission has relied on an old ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (the ECJ), and only acknowledged one of these aims – the protection of the client’s defence rights. While the ECJ has recently received the chance to align the EU standard to that of the ECHR by broadening the scope of protection, the Commission appears unwilling to abandon its previous stance. It is important that the Commission shoulders the responsibility to ensure a procedure that is fair, and which acknowledges the basic principles underpinning a society governed by the rule of law. The current approach breathes life into questions on the legitimacy of its actions and the appropriateness of letting it take on the roles of enforcer, prosecutor and judge in competition cases, where companies not only risk having to pay fines of up to ten percent of their annual turnover, but now also appear to have to face the threat of divestitures should the Commission find that they are infringing the EU competition rules.","PeriodicalId":489206,"journal":{"name":"Nordic journal of european law","volume":" 1183","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic journal of european law","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36969/njel.v7i2.26397","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The legal professional privilege is an important principle underpinning the EU judicial system as it ensures the proper administration of justice, procedural efficiency and protects fundamental rights such as a client’s defence rights and the right to privacy enshrined in Articles 47 and 7 of the Charter. In competition cases, the European Commission has relied on an old ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (the ECJ), and only acknowledged one of these aims – the protection of the client’s defence rights. While the ECJ has recently received the chance to align the EU standard to that of the ECHR by broadening the scope of protection, the Commission appears unwilling to abandon its previous stance. It is important that the Commission shoulders the responsibility to ensure a procedure that is fair, and which acknowledges the basic principles underpinning a society governed by the rule of law. The current approach breathes life into questions on the legitimacy of its actions and the appropriateness of letting it take on the roles of enforcer, prosecutor and judge in competition cases, where companies not only risk having to pay fines of up to ten percent of their annual turnover, but now also appear to have to face the threat of divestitures should the Commission find that they are infringing the EU competition rules.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
竞争法案件中的法律专业特权--保护正当司法的关键要素
法律职业特权是支撑欧盟司法体系的一项重要原则,因为它能确保司法的正确实施、程序的效率,并保护基本权利,如客户的辩护权和《宪章》第 47 条和第 7 条所规定的隐私权。在竞争案件中,欧盟委员会依据的是欧盟法院(ECJ)的一项旧裁决,只承认其中一个目标--保护客户的辩护权。虽然欧盟法院最近有机会通过扩大保护范围来使欧盟标准与《欧洲人权公约》的标准保持一致,但欧盟委员会似乎不愿放弃之前的立场。重要的是,欧盟委应承担起确保程序公正的责任,并承认法治社会的基本原则。目前的做法使人们对其行动的合法性以及让其在竞争案件中扮演执法者、检察官和法官的角色是否恰当产生了疑问,在这种情况下,企业不仅有可能被处以高达年营业额 10% 的罚款,而且一旦委员会认定其违反了欧盟竞争规则,企业似乎还将面临资产剥离的威胁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Digitalisation in EU Competition Law and the Swedish Principle of Transparency Transparency Unveiled: Access to Information in Digital Markets Act Proceedings at Member State Level – The German and Austrian Experience Digitalisation of the Preliminary Investigation Phase, Fundamental and Human Rights and the Principle of Openness - Balancing Conflicting Interests in the Review of Large Data Sets EU Competition Law, Fundamental Rights and the Principle of Transparency – An Evolving Relationship A Few Words on Drittwirkung, Transparency and Personal Integrity in the Light of Digitalization
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1