The EU institutional model of competition law enforcement evisited: How much rule of law suffices?

Q4 Social Sciences Pravni Zapisi Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.5937/pravzap0-40075
Dijana Marković-Bajalović
{"title":"The EU institutional model of competition law enforcement evisited: How much rule of law suffices?","authors":"Dijana Marković-Bajalović","doi":"10.5937/pravzap0-40075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The EU model of competition law enforcement has been criticized by many authors ever since antitrust provisions in the EEC Treaty became effective. The fundamental contradiction between the high level of fines threatened (and often imposed) for antitrust violations and the administrative, inquisitorial procedure for investigating antitrust offences and imposing sanctions has principally inspired the critics. The compatibility of the EU model with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR) was disputed, instigating the EU institutions to take steps to improve the institutional and procedural framework for applying competition rules. This process has not been completed yet. Directive 2019/1 raised additional controversies regarding the compliance of variegated national enforcement models with the rule of law. This article aims to analyze the genesis of the competition enforcement model in the EU, which materialized mainly through the EU secondary legislation and ECJ case law. We evaluate the EU model against the enforcement system imagined by the Ordoliberal school of thought and, secondly, against administrative models existing in two \"old\" Member States, in which the rule of law has deeply rooted - France and Germany. We conclude by identifying the most cumbersome deficiencies of the EU model and proposing possible solutions for eliminating them.","PeriodicalId":53056,"journal":{"name":"Pravni Zapisi","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pravni Zapisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap0-40075","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The EU model of competition law enforcement has been criticized by many authors ever since antitrust provisions in the EEC Treaty became effective. The fundamental contradiction between the high level of fines threatened (and often imposed) for antitrust violations and the administrative, inquisitorial procedure for investigating antitrust offences and imposing sanctions has principally inspired the critics. The compatibility of the EU model with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR) was disputed, instigating the EU institutions to take steps to improve the institutional and procedural framework for applying competition rules. This process has not been completed yet. Directive 2019/1 raised additional controversies regarding the compliance of variegated national enforcement models with the rule of law. This article aims to analyze the genesis of the competition enforcement model in the EU, which materialized mainly through the EU secondary legislation and ECJ case law. We evaluate the EU model against the enforcement system imagined by the Ordoliberal school of thought and, secondly, against administrative models existing in two "old" Member States, in which the rule of law has deeply rooted - France and Germany. We conclude by identifying the most cumbersome deficiencies of the EU model and proposing possible solutions for eliminating them.
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
欧盟竞争执法制度模式探访:多少法治就够了?
自从欧共体条约中的反垄断条款生效以来,欧盟的竞争执法模式就受到了许多作者的批评。对违反反托拉斯的行为处以高额罚款的威胁(而且往往是实际实施的),与调查违反反托拉斯行为和实施制裁的行政调查程序之间的根本矛盾,主要激发了批评者的灵感。欧盟模式与《欧洲人权公约》(ECHR)第6条的兼容性存在争议,促使欧盟机构采取措施改善适用竞争规则的制度和程序框架。这一过程尚未完成。《2019/1号指令》引发了更多关于不同国家执法模式是否符合法治的争议。本文旨在分析欧盟竞争执法模式的起源,其主要通过欧盟二级立法和欧洲法院判例法得以体现。我们将欧盟模式与自由主义思想学派所设想的执法体系进行对比,其次,对比两个法治根深蒂固的“老”成员国——法国和德国——现有的行政模式。最后,我们确定了欧盟模式中最棘手的缺陷,并提出了消除这些缺陷的可能解决方案。
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
Pravni Zapisi
Pravni Zapisi Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
The investor-state arbitration legitimacy crisis: Could AI be its future savior (or resurrector)? How much for a legal intern?: Internships at law offices in Serbia Impunity (or not) for civil disobedience Protection of the rights of persons with disabilities to work: Kazakhstan's experience from the perspective of international law and EU law Who is an online trader from the consumer law perspective?: From Serbia to the EU and back
×
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