Search

EU competition law appears to interpret fairness in B2B trade relations as "equal opportunities to trade" for market actors. A positive and pragmatic inquiry into the relevant regulations, cases and doctrines support that approach. This contribution suggests a new definition for these practices under EU competition law. Accordingly, any trade practice representing supremacy in bargaining power - usually dominance - and distorting the equal opportunity to trade of one or more trading partners could be conceived as unfair trade practices (UTPs) under EU competition law. Thus, these practices restrict competition according to EU competition law. Indeed, the EU Commission, Parliament and many Member States have emphasized the restrictive effects of UTPs even when practised by non-dominant undertakings. UTPs could include all kinds of trade practices toward trading partners, regardless of the industry and environment in which they occur, whether online or offline. This definition can also relieve competition lawyers from inefficient exploitative/exclusionary abusive conduct divisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the provisions of the regulations governing competition and antitrust law in the context of European jurisdiction. It explores the theoretical argument of the regulation primarily in the European Union by considering its conceptual implications to other relevant jurisdictions. It also examines the meaning of the framework citing that the integration of economic aspects, as well as political and cultural elements constitutes the core of democratic governance. Furthermore, it analysis the regulatory practices developed to protect free elections as well as free speech in economic competition.

The article reports on the move of the European Commission (EC) to replace the dominance standard, which has been into force in 1990, with a recast test. The author cites the aim of the Commission in adopting the new method including the desire to close a possible enforcement gap under the dominance test and most importantly the methodological framework it possesses. Moreover, the historical background of the adoption of the dominance standard is presented as well as the reason as to why it was chosen as opposed to any other competition-based tests that prevailed during the time. Also provided is explanation of the concept dominance.

The article focuses on the views of the two countervailing buyer power, the Irish Competition Authority and the High Court about the Kerry/Breeo merger in Europe. It discovers that the two grocery retailers failed to perform enough countervailing buyer power under the Competition Act 2002. It also investigates the other major aspects of the guidelines for retailer merger including the concept of countervailing buyer power, several observations of the merger, findings of the Authority and the High Court as well as the various implications related to merger control.

The article discusses the relevance between consumer and antitrust law in Europe. Authors highlight the positive and negative effects of commercial law in businesses and in the economy. It overviews the implementation of antitrust and commercial law as primary tools of determining consumer failures and explores how behavioral economics may facilitate identifying consumer failures and create efficient remedies for consumer protection. Lastly, it also examine the role of behavioral economics (BE) plays in controlling consumer failures within antitrust and consumer law.

The article offers updates on commercial policy in Bulgaria. It states that the Law on the Protection of Competition (LPC), which aims to harmonise the domestic regulatory framework with Council Nos. 1/2003 and 139/2004, has taken into effect on December 2, 2008. Moreover, the Commission on Protection of Competition (CPC) has been granted by the LPC with investigative powers, impose interim measure and approve and/or impose commitments. Furthermore, the Methodology for Determination of Sanctions approved under the LPC aims to provide the rules for the determination of pecuniary sanctions, fines and periodic penalty payments.