Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.15
Ana Pošćić, Adrijana Martinović
Today many companies are collecting and extracting data from different sources to help them with their strategic decision-making. Big data is the basis of data-driven economy, bringing significant competitive advantage and market power to companies who are able to harness and exploit its potential. Digital transformation of markets and economy challenges the existing structures of consumer protection, data protection and competition law. Data is a commodity as well as a strategic asset. The term Big data refers to the amount of data that cannot be processed in a short time by traditional informatics devices. Undertakings possessing a large scale of different data have a competitive advantage. Possible application of the essential facility doctrine to Big data issues has not attracted much attention in competition assessment. This paper will try to fill the gap by providing some insights into competition and data issues. Also, the question whether data can be considered under the essential facility doctrine will be analysed. Furthermore, it will be shown that essential facility criteria are applicable, although there is room for some adjustments to data markets. The last part of the paper will scrutinize the Digital Markets Act that tries to shed some light and clear some possible problematic behaviour of the so-called gatekeepers. The regulation leaves the conventional approach and shortens the process of tackling possible anti-competition concerns. It regulates only those undertakings that have significant impact on market and the possibility to become an important gateway in the future. When the status of a gatekeeper is established in accordance with all prescribed criteria, there will be no need to show that the elements of the essential facility doctrine are fulfilled. The essential facility doctrine will still be relevant to undertakings that are not designated as gatekeepers.
{"title":"The Interplay Between the Essential Facility Doctrine and the Digital Markets Act: Implications to Big Data","authors":"Ana Pošćić, Adrijana Martinović","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.15","url":null,"abstract":"Today many companies are collecting and extracting data from different sources to help them with their strategic decision-making. Big data is the basis of data-driven economy, bringing significant competitive advantage and market power to companies who are able to harness and exploit its potential. Digital transformation of markets and economy challenges the existing structures of consumer protection, data protection and competition law. Data is a commodity as well as a strategic asset. The term Big data refers to the amount of data that cannot be processed in a short time by traditional informatics devices. Undertakings possessing a large scale of different data have a competitive advantage. Possible application of the essential facility doctrine to Big data issues has not attracted much attention in competition assessment. This paper will try to fill the gap by providing some insights into competition and data issues. Also, the question whether data can be considered under the essential facility doctrine will be analysed. Furthermore, it will be shown that essential facility criteria are applicable, although there is room for some adjustments to data markets. The last part of the paper will scrutinize the Digital Markets Act that tries to shed some light and clear some possible problematic behaviour of the so-called gatekeepers. The regulation leaves the conventional approach and shortens the process of tackling possible anti-competition concerns. It regulates only those undertakings that have significant impact on market and the possibility to become an important gateway in the future. When the status of a gatekeeper is established in accordance with all prescribed criteria, there will be no need to show that the elements of the essential facility doctrine are fulfilled. The essential facility doctrine will still be relevant to undertakings that are not designated as gatekeepers.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46248005","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.13
V. Šmejkal
A new EU regulation called the Digital Markets Act aims to keep digital markets open and fair in the face of the power of the so-called internet gatekeepers. Although the DMA has, at the first sight, much in common with Article 102 TFEU, which prohibits abuse of dominant positions, it declares itself to be a different instrument pursuing different objectives and protecting different legal interests. This text seeks to identify the similarities and differences in the values and objectives pursued between Article 102 TFEU and the DMA. Both are tools in the toolbox of the European Commission’s DG Competition and their complementarity is desirable in theory and practice if competition-incompatible regulation of selected online platforms is not to occur, possibly leading to their unwanted double punishment for the same thing. The analysis carried out leads to the conclusion that, despite the insistence on their separate nature and on differences in their objectives, a value consensus prevails between the two instruments.
{"title":"Abuse of Dominance and the DMA – Differing Objectives or Prevailing Continuity?","authors":"V. Šmejkal","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.13","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.13","url":null,"abstract":"A new EU regulation called the Digital Markets Act aims to keep digital markets open and fair in the face of the power of the so-called internet gatekeepers. Although the DMA has, at the first sight, much in common with Article 102 TFEU, which prohibits abuse of dominant positions, it declares itself to be a different instrument pursuing different objectives and protecting different legal interests. This text seeks to identify the similarities and differences in the values and objectives pursued between Article 102 TFEU and the DMA. Both are tools in the toolbox of the European Commission’s DG Competition and their complementarity is desirable in theory and practice if competition-incompatible regulation of selected online platforms is not to occur, possibly leading to their unwanted double punishment for the same thing. The analysis carried out leads to the conclusion that, despite the insistence on their separate nature and on differences in their objectives, a value consensus prevails between the two instruments.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45242939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.17
M. Jakab
This contribution takes a look at the recent Google Android judgement of the General Court as a case study of antitrust informed by behavioural economics – the study of not fully rational economic agents. It contrasts the General Court’s pragmatic approach to economic evidence to the U.S. Supreme Court’s willingness to delve into economic theory, where the latter can prove more of an obstacle to the development of behavioural antitrust. It further concedes that cases relying on behavioural theories of harm can prove to be less predictable from a legal standpoint. This, nevertheless, does not obviate older legal tests, which might just need to be reformulated as requiring an analysis of effects, in line with the General Court’s rhetoric on the necessity to avoid false convictions in such cases. Lastly, the contribution argues that the relevance of behavioural antitrust will not fade in its entirety with new regulatory tools addressing similar issues.
{"title":"Google Android: Behavioural Theories of Harm in the Light of New Judgments and Regulatory Tools","authors":"M. Jakab","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.17","url":null,"abstract":"This contribution takes a look at the recent Google Android judgement of the General Court as a case study of antitrust informed by behavioural economics – the study of not fully rational economic agents. It contrasts the General Court’s pragmatic approach to economic evidence to the U.S. Supreme Court’s willingness to delve into economic theory, where the latter can prove more of an obstacle to the development of behavioural antitrust. It further concedes that cases relying on behavioural theories of harm can prove to be less predictable from a legal standpoint. This, nevertheless, does not obviate older legal tests, which might just need to be reformulated as requiring an analysis of effects, in line with the General Court’s rhetoric on the necessity to avoid false convictions in such cases. Lastly, the contribution argues that the relevance of behavioural antitrust will not fade in its entirety with new regulatory tools addressing similar issues.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42893457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.20
Marie Karfíková, Tomáš Šipoš
On 6 October 2022, the Council of the European Union adopted Regulation 2022/1854 on an emergency intervention to address high energy prices (Regulation 2022/1854). Regulation 2022/1854 establishes an emergency intervention to mitigate the effects of high energy prices through exceptional, targeted, and time-limited measures aiming to ensure the necessary solutions and respond to the current energy situation. For this purpose, three groups of measures are introduced: (i) measures aiming to reduce energy consumption, (ii) introducing a mandatory cap on market revenues for electricity producers, and (iii) introducing a solidarity contribution to be imposed on crude petroleum, natural gas, coal, and refinery companies. In this paper, the authors focus on the legal framework adopted in the Czech Republic and in Slovakia to introduce the mandatory cap on market revenues to electricity producers as well as the solidarity contribution.
{"title":"The Legal Framework of the Mandatory Cap on Market Revenues for Electricity Producers and the Solidarity Contribution in the Czech Republic and Slovakia","authors":"Marie Karfíková, Tomáš Šipoš","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.20","url":null,"abstract":"On 6 October 2022, the Council of the European Union adopted Regulation 2022/1854 on an emergency intervention to address high energy prices (Regulation 2022/1854). Regulation 2022/1854 establishes an emergency intervention to mitigate the effects of high energy prices through exceptional, targeted, and time-limited measures aiming to ensure the necessary solutions and respond to the current energy situation. For this purpose, three groups of measures are introduced: (i) measures aiming to reduce energy consumption, (ii) introducing a mandatory cap on market revenues for electricity producers, and (iii) introducing a solidarity contribution to be imposed on crude petroleum, natural gas, coal, and refinery companies. In this paper, the authors focus on the legal framework adopted in the Czech Republic and in Slovakia to introduce the mandatory cap on market revenues to electricity producers as well as the solidarity contribution.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135409832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.12
J. Bejček
Antitrust law arose from political pressures and has been subject to political pressures all the time. Recently, the slogan of the digital and economic transformation of society has been spread and there have been discussions about the impact of this social trend on the nature and goals of competition law. The digitalization of antitrust itself does not affect the already rather controversial debate on the goals of competition law. While digitalization does not change the goals of competition law, and competition law “only” has to deal with the challenge of adapting to technological developments within its tool-box, the so-called sustainability is associated with pressures to change and expand the goals of antitrust themselves. However, the protection of competition and consumer welfare must remain a priority, and competition authorities should not be forced to pursue a political agenda outside their remit under the pretext of a significant social change. Considerations of the so-called sustainability, however defined, must be addressed in the context of a classical competitive analysis, which provides enough flexibility to do so even today
{"title":"Sustainability of “Traditional Antitrust” under the Challenge of “Sustainability” and Digitization","authors":"J. Bejček","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.12","url":null,"abstract":"Antitrust law arose from political pressures and has been subject to political pressures all the time. Recently, the slogan of the digital and economic transformation of society has been spread and there have been discussions about the impact of this social trend on the nature and goals of competition law. The digitalization of antitrust itself does not affect the already rather controversial debate on the goals of competition law. While digitalization does not change the goals of competition law, and competition law “only” has to deal with the challenge of adapting to technological developments within its tool-box, the so-called sustainability is associated with pressures to change and expand the goals of antitrust themselves. However, the protection of competition and consumer welfare must remain a priority, and competition authorities should not be forced to pursue a political agenda outside their remit under the pretext of a significant social change. Considerations of the so-called sustainability, however defined, must be addressed in the context of a classical competitive analysis, which provides enough flexibility to do so even today","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45553239","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.16
Rastislav Funta
In e-commerce, data has long played a special role as a factor in competition between different players, and its importance continues to grow. A review of the current legal situation is a basic prerequisite for any legal policy proposals to improve market access conditions and thus competition in a platform economy. As a result, the current article attempts to discuss the legal framework that governs the relevant legal relationships between platforms and retailers on the example of Amazon. The emphasis is on the scope of retailers’ antitrust claims against online platforms, as well as the extent of platforms’ obligations. Participation and access claims relating to data or information, as well as certain marketing services, are particularly relevant in this regard.
{"title":"Relationships between Platforms and Retailers (on the Example of Amazon)","authors":"Rastislav Funta","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.16","url":null,"abstract":"In e-commerce, data has long played a special role as a factor in competition between different players, and its importance continues to grow. A review of the current legal situation is a basic prerequisite for any legal policy proposals to improve market access conditions and thus competition in a platform economy. As a result, the current article attempts to discuss the legal framework that governs the relevant legal relationships between platforms and retailers on the example of Amazon. The emphasis is on the scope of retailers’ antitrust claims against online platforms, as well as the extent of platforms’ obligations. Participation and access claims relating to data or information, as well as certain marketing services, are particularly relevant in this regard.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43047975","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.22
M. Sedláček
Book review on Frintová, Dita. Mezitímní a částečné rozhodnutí ve světle judikatury a evropské komparace [Interlocutory And Partial Decisions In The Context Of Case Law And European Comparisons]. Praha: Wolters Kluwer ČR, 2022, 320 s.
{"title":"Frintová, Dita. Mezitímní a částečné rozhodnutí ve světle judikatury a evropské komparace [Interlocutory and Partial Decisions in the Context of Case Law and European Comparisons]","authors":"M. Sedláček","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.22","url":null,"abstract":"Book review on Frintová, Dita. Mezitímní a částečné rozhodnutí ve světle judikatury a evropské komparace [Interlocutory And Partial Decisions In The Context Of Case Law And European Comparisons]. Praha: Wolters Kluwer ČR, 2022, 320 s.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43289515","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.18
Jaroslav Denemark
Polarization of the society is nowadays easier than ever due to the strong influence of social media. Opaque algorithms personalize news feed of users through massive data processing and thus creating effects that are fueling extremization of opinions. Negative effects of social media can be used by third parties to influence society to achieve their goals, however antidemocratic. Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act aim to regulate Digital Single Market through fair competition and consumer protection regulation. This regulation can have significant impact on the democratic deficit of the European Union as it has potential to eradicate analyzed negative effects of social media on the polarization of society.
{"title":"Strengthening the European Union by Regulating the Digital Single Market","authors":"Jaroslav Denemark","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.18","url":null,"abstract":"Polarization of the society is nowadays easier than ever due to the strong influence of social media. Opaque algorithms personalize news feed of users through massive data processing and thus creating effects that are fueling extremization of opinions. Negative effects of social media can be used by third parties to influence society to achieve their goals, however antidemocratic. Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act aim to regulate Digital Single Market through fair competition and consumer protection regulation. This regulation can have significant impact on the democratic deficit of the European Union as it has potential to eradicate analyzed negative effects of social media on the polarization of society.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48101554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.21
Tomáš Friedel
The Czech Bar Association published a text which has the words “code of ethics” in its title. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the norms contained in the code are actually related to ethics or whether they concern different fields. The paper first explains the raison d’être of codes of ethics in general and briefly introduces the Czech Bar Association and the origin of its code of ethics. The principal section of the paper is dedicated to a detailed analysis of the text of the Czech Bar Association’s code of ethics applying a method used in England for similar purposes by Donald Nicolson. The analysis shows that the Czech Bar Association’s code of ethics deals with ethical issues only to a lesser extent and that it contains numerous provisions which do not deal with ethics at all. The paper proposes to remedy this unsuitable state by creating two separate codes. The first would primarily regulate ethically relevant situations in legal practice. The other code would contain “other” rules of the profession.
{"title":"An Ethically Indifferent Code of Ethics? Analysis of the Character of the Czech Bar Association’s Code of Ethics","authors":"Tomáš Friedel","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.21","url":null,"abstract":"The Czech Bar Association published a text which has the words “code of ethics” in its title. The aim of this paper is to determine whether the norms contained in the code are actually related to ethics or whether they concern different fields. The paper first explains the raison d’être of codes of ethics in general and briefly introduces the Czech Bar Association and the origin of its code of ethics. The principal section of the paper is dedicated to a detailed analysis of the text of the Czech Bar Association’s code of ethics applying a method used in England for similar purposes by Donald Nicolson. The analysis shows that the Czech Bar Association’s code of ethics deals with ethical issues only to a lesser extent and that it contains numerous provisions which do not deal with ethics at all. The paper proposes to remedy this unsuitable state by creating two separate codes. The first would primarily regulate ethically relevant situations in legal practice. The other code would contain “other” rules of the profession.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42443961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-07DOI: 10.14712/23366478.2023.14
Ondrej Blažo
The aim of this paper is to evaluate, if competition-like efficiencies of European-style rule of reason shall apply also in the context of the ex-ante regulation by the DMA. The rationale of such consideration lies in the concept of proportionality of the EU regulation and the assumption that EU law cannot proscribe behaviour with beneficial outcomes and effects that does not have negative consequences on the internal market outweighing the positive effects. The analysis is divided into three parts in this paper: position of the rule of law and the per se prohibition in the legal development of the EU competition law, the relationship between the DMA and competition law, including competition-based efficiencies brought in digital market cases and finally the per se prohibition included in the DMA. The analysis of the development of the case law showed that in the EU competition law the principle of per se prohibitions was never accepted and the CJEU accepted justifications outside the text of the statutory exemptions. Even though the aim of the DMA may be the introduction of a per se prohibition in order to facilitate the Commission’s enforcement, it cannot be surprising if the CJ EU will, in some case in the future, follow the path of the EU-style rule of reason in the framework of the DMA as well on the basis of proportionality principle. The lesson learned from application of rule of reason in the context of agreements restricting competition or as a specific form of objective justification in the context of abuse of dominant position does not undermine effectiveness of competition law. The quasi per se concept can satisfy both: it shows that it is not probable that such a behaviour will be allowed and at the same time it dodges proportionality objections because the prohibition is not, at least theoretically, absolutely, per se.
{"title":"Efficiencies under the Digital Markets Act – Is There Space for the Rule of Reason?","authors":"Ondrej Blažo","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2023.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2023.14","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to evaluate, if competition-like efficiencies of European-style rule of reason shall apply also in the context of the ex-ante regulation by the DMA. The rationale of such consideration lies in the concept of proportionality of the EU regulation and the assumption that EU law cannot proscribe behaviour with beneficial outcomes and effects that does not have negative consequences on the internal market outweighing the positive effects. The analysis is divided into three parts in this paper: position of the rule of law and the per se prohibition in the legal development of the EU competition law, the relationship between the DMA and competition law, including competition-based efficiencies brought in digital market cases and finally the per se prohibition included in the DMA. The analysis of the development of the case law showed that in the EU competition law the principle of per se prohibitions was never accepted and the CJEU accepted justifications outside the text of the statutory exemptions. Even though the aim of the DMA may be the introduction of a per se prohibition in order to facilitate the Commission’s enforcement, it cannot be surprising if the CJ EU will, in some case in the future, follow the path of the EU-style rule of reason in the framework of the DMA as well on the basis of proportionality principle. The lesson learned from application of rule of reason in the context of agreements restricting competition or as a specific form of objective justification in the context of abuse of dominant position does not undermine effectiveness of competition law. The quasi per se concept can satisfy both: it shows that it is not probable that such a behaviour will be allowed and at the same time it dodges proportionality objections because the prohibition is not, at least theoretically, absolutely, per se.","PeriodicalId":52921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45769363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：