Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Enforcement of EU Competition Law by National Courts

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
EU Competition and State Aid Rules

Part of the book series: Europeanization and Globalization ((EAG,volume 3))

  • 1141 Accesses

Abstract

Regulation 1/2003 is the legal instrument that has probably brought about the most important changes in the history of the application of EU competition law. It has extensively altered existing procedures for the application of what are now Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. Its importance is indicated by the direct applicability of its rules in Member States by their national competition authorities and national courts. By providing explicitly for the possibility of national courts applying Articles 101 and 102, Regulation 1/2003 has promoted the private enforcement of competition rules. The authors, inter alia, discuss basic rules on cooperation between the European Commission, national competition authorities and national courts pursuant to Regulation 1/2003 and novelties in the Directive on Actions for Damages as regards enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 by national courts. In addition, taking into account the fact that basic procedural rules indispensable for the enforcement of competition rules by national courts are not harmonised, the authors point out limitations on harmonisation in terms of not only normative rules but also legal culture and legal traditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Case C-52/09 TeliaSonera Sverige ECLI:EU:C:2011:83, paras 21–22.

  2. 2.

    Article 101/1 states: ‘The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which may affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal market’. Article 102 stipulates: ‘Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the internal market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States’ (emphasis added).

  3. 3.

    See e.g. Articles 119 and 120 on economic policy. According to Article 120, ‘(t)he Member States and the Union shall act in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition, favouring an efficient allocation of resources’. As part of the provisions of the TFEU on the approximation of laws, appropriate measures may be adopted by the EU institutions in order to ensure that competition in the internal market is not distorted: ‘Where the Commission finds that a difference between the provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States is distorting the conditions of competition in the internal market and that the resultant distortion needs to be eliminated, it shall consult the Member States concerned. If such consultation does not result in an agreement eliminating the distortion in question, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall issue the necessary directives. Any other appropriate measures provided for in the Treaties may be adopted.’

  4. 4.

    Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L1, 4.1.2003, p 1).

  5. 5.

    Until the entry into force of Regulation 1/2003 (1 May 2004), the Commission had the sole power to apply Article 101(3) TFEU, which was granted to it under Art 9 of Regulation No 17: First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (OJ 13, 21.02.1962, p 204).

  6. 6.

    For example, see para 1 of the Preamble of Regulation 1/2003.

  7. 7.

    Case C-453/99 Courage v Crehan ECLI:EU:C:2001:465, para 23.

  8. 8.

    As stated in the Preamble of Regulation 1/2003 (para 1), ‘In order to establish a system which ensures that competition in the common market is not distorted, Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty must be applied effectively and uniformly in the Community’.

  9. 9.

    Directive 2014/104/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 26 November 2014 on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringement of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 349, 5.12.2014, p. 1.

  10. 10.

    The paper primarily deals with general enforcement issues in one country, but some points regarding the binding effect of decisions of competition authorities are valid for any Member State.

  11. 11.

    Directive 2014/14/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2014 on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union (OJ L 349, 5.12.2014, p. 1).

  12. 12.

    Article 9 of the Directive on actions for damages.

  13. 13.

    Article 3(1)(b) TFEU.

  14. 14.

    Declaration 17 concerning primacy annexed to the final act of the intergovernmental conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007.

  15. 15.

    Article 5(2) TEU.

  16. 16.

    Article 4(3) TEU.

  17. 17.

    Article 5(3–4) TEU.

  18. 18.

    Article 19(1) TEU.

  19. 19.

    Article 13(1) TEU.

  20. 20.

    Article 4 of the Directive on actions for damages.

  21. 21.

    Pilot field study on the functioning of the national judicial systems for the application of competition law rules. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/effective-justice/files/final_report_competition_and_eu_28_member_states_factsheets_en.pdf. Accessed 4 July 2015.

  22. 22.

    Pilot field study, pp. 11–12.

  23. 23.

    Pilot field study, p. 16.

  24. 24.

    Pilot field study, p. 21.

  25. 25.

    Pilot field study, pp. 26–28.

  26. 26.

    Pilot field study, p. 28.

  27. 27.

    Pilot field study, p. 29.

  28. 28.

    Pilot field study, pp. 29–30.

  29. 29.

    Pilot field study, pp. 31–34.

  30. 30.

    Pilot field study, p. 35.

  31. 31.

    Pilot field study, p. 37.

  32. 32.

    Pilot field study, pp. 73–74.

  33. 33.

    Pilot field study, p 75 et seq.

  34. 34.

    Article 5 of Regulation 1/2003.

  35. 35.

    Article 15 of Regulation 1/2003.

  36. 36.

    Article 9 of the Directive on actions for damages.

  37. 37.

    Case T-111/96 ITT Promedia v Commission ECLI:EU:T:1998:183, para 30.

  38. 38.

    Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

  39. 39.

    E.g. Case T-526/10 Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Others v European Commission ECLI:EU:T:2013:215, paras 28, 29, 35.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

    Jasminka Pecotić Kaufman

  2. Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

    Siniša Petrović

Authors
  1. Jasminka Pecotić Kaufman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Siniša Petrović
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jasminka Pecotić Kaufman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. General Court of EU, Luxembourg, Luxembourg

    Vesna Tomljenović

  2. Faculty of Law, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia

    Nada Bodiroga-Vukobrat

  3. Faculty of Law, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia

    Vlatka Butorac Malnar

  4. Faculty of Law, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia

    Ivana Kunda

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Pecotić Kaufman, J., Petrović, S. (2017). The Enforcement of EU Competition Law by National Courts. In: Tomljenović, V., Bodiroga-Vukobrat, N., Butorac Malnar, V., Kunda, I. (eds) EU Competition and State Aid Rules. Europeanization and Globalization, vol 3. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47962-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47962-9_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-47961-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-47962-9

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation