Browsing by Author "Vasconcelos, Rita Leandro"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Commitment decisions: is the sky the limit? - commentary to Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 15 September 2016, Case T-76/14, Morningstar, Inc. v European CommissionPublication . Vasconcelos, Rita LeandroIn its judgment of 15 September 2016, the General Court ruled on whether the commitments offered by Thompson Reuters to the European Commission during an investigation of a possible abuse of dominant position were sufficient to address the competition concerns identified by the Commission. This is only the second time the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on Commission decisions rendering binding the commitments offered by an undertaking Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003. With regard to standing, the General Court ruled the appeal lodged by a competitor admissible. As for substance, the General Court generally confirmed the previous case law. It ruled on the commitments meet the competition concerns identified by the institution, the different proportionality standard in Article 9 decisions as compared to Article 7 Regulation 1/2003 decisions (formal decision finding an infringement), and the limited scope of judicial review of the Court of Justice of the European Union in these appeals.
- The adoption of remedies under regulation 1/2003: between success and coherence*Publication . Vasconcelos, Rita LeandroRegulation 1/2003 allows the European Commission to adopt structural and behavioural remedies when it finds that an undertaking has abused its dominant position. Notwithstanding, the Regulation lacks sufficient rules to guide the institu-tion’s decision-making activity or to help undertakings predict the consequences of their behaviour. This article’s purpose is to take stock of the Commission’s practice in imposing or accepting remedies so far, by discussing the limits to the Commission’s activity and the paths it may take when adopting remedies in antitrust cases. The first part will be the introduction to the topic. In the second part, it will be proposed that the main drivers of the Commission when adopting remedies are three-fold: the goals of EU competition law; the general objectives of EU competition law enforcement; and the specific objectives to be pursued by the remedy vis-à-vis the infringement, which will largely depend on the circum-stances of the case, the market and the type of abuse. In the third part, it will be submitted that the Commission’s activity is limited by the requirements that must govern the decision of adopting remedies: effectiveness, pro-portionality, timeliness and legal certainty. In the fourth part, it will be submitted that the actual choice of remedies depends on the type of infringement, procedure (whether article 7 or article 9 of Regulation 1/2003) and the market. The focus will be on energy and digital markets: the former to illustrate cases of commitment decisions, the latter to figure out the adequacy of the application of remedies in dynamic markets. In the fifth part, the article will consider whether the current legal framework is suited to the adoption of remedies in a continuous changing environment or some changes are required. The sixth part will be the conclusion.