什么是“竞争法”?-衡量欧盟成员国监管平台对企业协议的回旋余地

J. Franck, N. Stock
{"title":"什么是“竞争法”?-衡量欧盟成员国监管平台对企业协议的回旋余地","authors":"J. Franck, N. Stock","doi":"10.1093/yel/yeaa006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"If both national competition law and article 101 TFEU apply to an agreement, the former must not set rules that are stricter than the latter. Member States remain free, though, to impose stricter rules if they are not classified as ‘competition law’. We analyse relevant jurisprudence by the English and French courts that have dealt with potential conflicts between, on the one hand, EU competition law and, on the other hand, the common law restraint of trade doctrine and the pratiques restrictives de concurrence under French commercial law. We develop criteria that allow (national) ‘competition law’ to be distinguished from similar regulatory interventions into agreements that pursue purposes distinct from article 101 TFEU and which, therefore, must not be regarded as ‘competition law’. This paper illustrates and elaborates on the challenges for the implementation of our approach by focusing on the ban on the use of parity clauses by hotel booking platforms in France, Austria, Italy and Belgium. We map a possible way forward to prevent further regulatory fragmentation in the internal market with regard to the regulation of platform-to-business agreements.","PeriodicalId":41752,"journal":{"name":"Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy","volume":"68 1","pages":"320-386"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is ‘Competition Law’?—Measuring EU Member States’ Leeway to Regulate Platform-to-Business Agreements\",\"authors\":\"J. Franck, N. Stock\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/yel/yeaa006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"If both national competition law and article 101 TFEU apply to an agreement, the former must not set rules that are stricter than the latter. Member States remain free, though, to impose stricter rules if they are not classified as ‘competition law’. We analyse relevant jurisprudence by the English and French courts that have dealt with potential conflicts between, on the one hand, EU competition law and, on the other hand, the common law restraint of trade doctrine and the pratiques restrictives de concurrence under French commercial law. We develop criteria that allow (national) ‘competition law’ to be distinguished from similar regulatory interventions into agreements that pursue purposes distinct from article 101 TFEU and which, therefore, must not be regarded as ‘competition law’. This paper illustrates and elaborates on the challenges for the implementation of our approach by focusing on the ban on the use of parity clauses by hotel booking platforms in France, Austria, Italy and Belgium. We map a possible way forward to prevent further regulatory fragmentation in the internal market with regard to the regulation of platform-to-business agreements.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41752,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"320-386\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/yel/yeaa006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/yel/yeaa006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

如果同时适用国家竞争法和第101条,则前者不能制定比后者更严格的规则。然而,成员国仍然可以自由地实施更严格的规则,如果它们没有被归类为“竞争法”。我们分析了英国和法国法院处理潜在冲突的相关法理学,一方面是欧盟竞争法,另一方面是普通法对贸易原则的限制和法国商法下的合意行为限制。我们制定了标准,允许(国家)“竞争法”与类似的监管干预区分开来,这些监管干预是为了追求与第101条TFEU不同的目的,因此不能被视为“竞争法”。本文通过关注法国、奥地利、意大利和比利时的酒店预订平台禁止使用平价条款,说明并详细阐述了实施我们的方法所面临的挑战。在平台对企业协议的监管方面,我们制定了一种可能的前进方式,以防止内部市场进一步出现监管分裂。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
What is ‘Competition Law’?—Measuring EU Member States’ Leeway to Regulate Platform-to-Business Agreements
If both national competition law and article 101 TFEU apply to an agreement, the former must not set rules that are stricter than the latter. Member States remain free, though, to impose stricter rules if they are not classified as ‘competition law’. We analyse relevant jurisprudence by the English and French courts that have dealt with potential conflicts between, on the one hand, EU competition law and, on the other hand, the common law restraint of trade doctrine and the pratiques restrictives de concurrence under French commercial law. We develop criteria that allow (national) ‘competition law’ to be distinguished from similar regulatory interventions into agreements that pursue purposes distinct from article 101 TFEU and which, therefore, must not be regarded as ‘competition law’. This paper illustrates and elaborates on the challenges for the implementation of our approach by focusing on the ban on the use of parity clauses by hotel booking platforms in France, Austria, Italy and Belgium. We map a possible way forward to prevent further regulatory fragmentation in the internal market with regard to the regulation of platform-to-business agreements.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊最新文献
The unified patent court Corporate tax reform in the European Union: are the stars finally aligned? Rescuing transparency in the digital economy: in search of a common notion in EU consumer and data protection law The impact of the Digital Content Directive on online platforms’ Terms of Service The European Union’s Preferential Trade Agreements: between convergence and differentiation
×
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