Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
68,801
result(s) for
"COMPETITION LAW"
Sort by:
Antitrust procedural fairness
\"Much of antitrust law scholarship has focused on substantive legal issues--theories of harm and changing law and policy. Surprisingly, there has been very little work that is comparative, on a fundamental element that is a critical building block to effective policy--procedural fairness. Procedural fairness encompasses issues of transparency and due process. Procedural fairness has been an important issue in global antitrust for some time. The types of due process concerns raised globally often relate to the lack of effective representation, the use of industrial policy by third parties, and procedural tools that do not allow for the most effective advocacy to lead to efficient outcomes. This book focuses on these issues and teases out common problems and distinct issues in particular jurisdictions. This allows for a rethink of creating a more effective system for procedural fairness, an exploration of these issues in each jurisdiction, along with highlights of particular cases in which due process issues have emerged\"--Dust jacket.
Book
The new goals of EU competition law: sustainability, labour rights, and privacy
Competition law is experiencing a transformation from a niche economic tool to a Swiss knife of broader industrial and social policy. Relatedly, there is a narrative that sees an expansive role for competition law in broad areas such as sustainability, privacy, and workers and labour rights, and a counternarrative that wants to deny it that role. There is rich scholarship on this area, but little empirical backing. In this article, we present the results of a comprehensive empirical research into whether new goals and objectives such as sustainability, privacy, and workers and labour rights are indeed endorsed in EU competition law and practice. We do so through an investigation into the totality of Court of Justice rulings, Commission decisions, Advocate General opinions, and public statements of the Commission. Our findings inject data into the debate and help dispel misconceptions that may arise by overly focusing on cherry-picked high-profile decisions while overlooking the rest of the EU’s institutional practice. We find that sustainability is partially recognised as a goal whereas privacy and labour rights are not. We also show that all three goals are more recent than classic goals, that EU institutions have not engaged much with the areas of sustainability, privacy, and workers and labour rights, and that the Commission’s rhetoric is seemingly out of pace with decisional practice. We also identify trends that may bode for change, and we contextualize our analysis through the lens of the history and nature of the EU’s integration and economic constitution.
Journal Article
Competition law and economic regulation : making and managing markets
\"Niamh Dunne undertakes a systematic exploration of the relationship between competition law and economic regulation as legal mechanisms of market control. Beginning from a theoretical assessment of these legal instruments as discrete mechanisms, the author goes on to address numerous facets of the substantive interrelationship between competition law and economic regulation. She considers, amongst other aspects, the concept of regulatory competition law; deregulation, liberalisation and 'regulation for competition'; the concurrent application of competition law in regulated markets; and relevant institutional aspects including market study procedures, the distribution of enforcement powers between competition agencies and sector regulators, and certain legal powers that demonstrate a 'hybridised' quality lying between competition law and economic regulation. Throughout her assessment, Dunne identifies and explores recurrent considerations that inform and shape the optimal relationship between these legal mechanisms within any jurisdiction\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
To discriminate or not to discriminate? Personalised pricing in online markets as exploitative abuse of dominance
The advent of big data analytics has favoured the emergence of forms of price discrimination based on consumers’ profiles and their online behaviour (i.e. personalised pricing). The paper analyses this practice as a possible exploitative abuse by dominant online platforms. The paper argues that, in view of its “mixed” effect on consumers’ welfare, personalised pricing requires a case-by-case assessment under EU competition law and thus it should not be banned a priori. However, in view of the recent case law of the European Court of Justice on price discrimination, the National Competition Authorities (NCAs) and the European Commission would face a high burden of proof to sanction this conduct under Art. 102(c) TFEU. Finally, the paper argues that, due to its case-by-case approach, competition law seems more suitable than omnibus regulation to tackle the negative effects that personalised pricing could have on consumers’ welfare. In particular, an NCA/the European Commission could negotiate with online platforms different kinds of behavioural commitments: transparency requirements, limits on data collection/user profiling, rights to opt out of personalised pricing and the obligation to share customers’ data with competitors could significantly tame the risks of personalised pricing.
Journal Article
Competition and antitrust law : a very short introduction
\"Drawing on case studies from the US and the European Union, this Very Short Introduction explores the promise and limitations of competitive market dynamics. In examining the laws and the way they are enforced, Ariel Ezrachi considers the delicate relationship between a free market economy and government intervention, and the fascinating forces of competition that shape modern society.\" --Publisher description.
BOOK
The Human Right to a Fair Trial in Competition Law Enforcement Procedures: A Rising Issue in Indonesian Experiences
The Indonesian Competition Supervisory Commission (ICSC) has the authority to investigate, prosecute, adjudicate, decide, and impose sanctions on business actors for violating Indonesian competition law. It also has the authority to establish procedural laws for the competition law enforcement procedures within its institution. This single role raises various issues in the current context, including the right to a fair trial and checks and balances. This article seeks to define the position of human rights, particularly the right to a fair trial, in competition law enforcement procedures. The result is that competition law enforcement procedures are subordinate to human rights, so they must be exercised in compliance with human rights standards, particularly the right to a fair trial. Based on the experience in Indonesia, this study finds that the ICSC’s single role is incompatible with human rights commitments in fair competition law enforcement procedures. As an alternative solution, this article encourages a modification and adjustment based on human rights commitments and checks and balances mechanism by limiting one of the ICSC’s authorities and broadening the interference of the Supreme Court in enforcing Indonesian competition law at the ICSC level.
Journal Article
Securing Compliance
Bargaining, negotiation and civil penalty sanctions together constitute central techniques used by regulators in securing compliance with the law. This book is a timely exploration of these practices, constructing a principled framework for evaluating their legitimacy and thereby drawing into sharper focus the importance of the constitutional principles in regulatory compliance. Although Australian competition law provides the focal point of the book, its analysis and critique is equally applicable to other competition law regimes and to other areas of business regulation. While there are numerous empirical studies of regulatory enforcement, this book introduces a normative dimension to the debate by seeking to identify whether there are certain principled and ethical limits that inform and circumscribe the limits of legitimate enforcement practice. It is likely to be of interest to scholars in the fields of public law, criminology, economics, and regulation, and may also be of considerable assistance to legal practitioners in providing a principled, legal foundation from which to draw in their dealings with regulators.
eBook
Revisiting China's competition law and its interaction with intellectual property rights
\"Taking the dynamics of EU competition policy as a reference, the author provides a historical perspective of China's competition law, enforcement mechanisms and future challenges against the background of ongoing economic reforms and the concomitant modernisation of the judicial system. Readers are familiarised with the main principles of China's IP Guidelines. Recent judicial and administrative landmark decisions are covered as well. The author studies issues at the nexus between China's competition law and IP regime. Coherent goals of the two legal systems are achieved through seemingly opposite means: Safeguarding free competition for all market players versus granting exclusive rights to IP owners. It is a constant challenge for China's competition authorities to strike an optimal balance when applying competition law to the exercise of IP rights\"--Publisher's website.
Book
Enforcing Corporate Opportunity Rules: Antitrust Risks and Antitrust Failures
This paper identifies the potential competitive harm in the enforcement of corporate opportunity rules and shows that antitrust intervention cannot sufficiently address such harm. It suggests that the current antitrust framework is ill-suited to tackle the anticompetitive risks, in particular, regarding effects on innovation. The paper first explains corporate opportunity rules in EU Member States and in USA corporate law and their strategic use in a business context, highlighting also why they may be efficient. Then, it highlights possible negative effects of a strategic use of these rules on competition in terms of static and dynamic efficiency. Having stressed the abovementioned competitive implications, the paper engages in an analysis of the current framework of competition law to show how competition law provisions are, in most cases, ill-suited to address the potential anticompetitive harm of corporate opportunity rules. Finally, it recommends a way forward based on corporate law reform.
Journal Article