Competition Enforcement in the Recently Acceded Member States

19 March, 2009

Location: Budapest – Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences

Date: 08 May 2009

See more here.



Countries that recently acceded to the European Union have long history with competition law. Most of these countries also represent smaller, open market economies, which have faced a rapid and recent privatisation process. These countries have also endured several common historical events that make them face similar market situations and problems including inter alia excessive pricing, bid rigging, refusal to access as well as issues related to the current financial crisis.

Topics include

The aim of this conference is to address issues that arise in competition enforcement in these rapidly developing economies with ever increasing competition expertise. This one day conference will address topics in the application of competition legislation on anticompetitive agreements, unilateral conduct, as well as issues related to the application of competition legislation in the wake of the financial crisis.


Our speakers include the President of the Hungarian NCA (Gazdasági Versenyhivatal), the Head of Competition Outreach at OECD, the VIce-President of the Polish NCA (Office of Competition and Consumer Protection), Vice-Chairman of the Czech NCA (Office for the Protection of Competition), Members of the Hungarian Competition Council, Chief-Economist of the Hungarian NCA, senior OECD experts, highly acknowledged academics, officials and lawyers from leading regional law firms.


We gratefully acknowledge the support of the following sponsors:


Our media partner is



16 March, 2009

See an interesting project here. I was always a big fan of open source-free projects. This is going into the right direction. 


An On-Line Case Book

Spencer Weber Waller

Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies

Loyola University Chicago School of Law

25 E. Pearson Suite 1341

Chicago, IL 60611



This on-line casebook examines the fields of international antitrust and international trade law. In general, it examines how the United States and other jurisdictions regulate competition among firms which do business abroad. This will include how competition policy regulates individuals and firms located outside the United States in their competition with United States firms as well as the rules governing United States firms.

These materials are intended for use in a U.S. style law school class or seminar and designed to provide the base knowledge necessary to engage in sophisticated research in the field and to produce a research based paper of 20-25 pages in length. By necessity, these materials are in English and have primarily a United States focus. The value of an on-line casebook in this field goes beyond the merely the cost savings and convenience. It is also an opportunity for a collaborative exercise that will allow for the creation of a more in-depth and creative set of materials that can be done in traditional hard cover format. Use of the casebook for educational purposes with attribution is available on a royalty-free basis under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License, available at For all other uses please contact Professor Waller at the Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies at Loyola University Chicago School of Law or

I therefore invite any competition law teacher or scholar to submit additional chapters on other competition law topics or jurisdictions not covered in these materials for inclusion in future iterations of these materials. Materials must be original or accompanied with proof of permission/license to use for this purpose and be in English and in either Word or Word Perfect. Submission of materials constitutes your permission to include the material in future editions of the on-line casebook for educational purposes with attribution available on a royalty-free basis under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License, available at

Submission of materials also constitutes permission to edit the submitted material for style, content, and compatibility with the existing text, although every reasonable effort will be made to allow you to review edited material before posting on-line. I look forward to working with the global competition law and policy community to make this the most effective and interesting teaching tool possible.


Table of Contents


Chapter One – Extraterritoriality: The U.S. Perspective

Chapter Two – Extraterritoriality: Foreign Perspectives and Commentary

Chapter Three – Jurisdiction Over Export Conduct

Chapter Four – International Litigation Issues

Chapter Five – Unsolvable Conflicts

Chapter Six – The Role of Foreign Governments

Chapter Seven – Antitrust and Trade Issues

Chapter Eight – International Mergers and Joint Ventures

Chapter Nine – International Antitrust I: Enforcement Cooperation

Chapter Ten – International Antitrust II: Harmonization and Convergence

Nice work…again!

23 December, 2008

I suppose most of the competition community knows about the excellent research papers that the Swedish Competition Authority presents usually, so I just would like to point out their knew ‘pros and cons’ publication about the workshop in November on vertical restraints. You can also download the slides of the presentation here. You can also order a hardcover publication.

Richard Whish: Competition Law

22 September, 2008

The new edition of the book by Richard Whish has just arrived to me. It not only looks snuggish to the eyes, but – as always – very promising due to its content. I have benefited during my studies for my PhD in Hungary, for my studies at King’s College London for an LL.M. in Competition Law and for my every day life (teaching, consulting, research) enormously from the previous edition. I think I will have the same experience with the new edition.

By the way: I got my first “international citation” that I am aware of (p.40, fn. 204). I am truly honoured!

Comments on the White Paper on Damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules

14 August, 2008

The European Commission uploaded the comments on the damages White Paper to the Europa website. Many contributions indeed. It is a topic that not only in theory but also in practice seems to concern many European interest groups, professionals, specialists, etc.

After commenting the settlements Green Paper, the Competition Law Research Centre (Hungary) commented on the damages White Paper. See here. In the LIDC report there are also two Hungarians who contributed to the comment.

Some contributors:

  • ABA, American Bar Association, Sections of Antitrust Law, US
  • Allen & Overy LLP
  • Baker & McKenzie LLP
  • Bundesministerium für Justiz, Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit, Bundesministerium für Soziales und Konsumentenschutz, AT
  • Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie, Bundesministerium der Justiz, Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz, Bundeskartellamt, DE
  • Bundesrat, DE
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Fastweb, IT
  • Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP
  • Groupe France Télécom, FR
  • HCLRC Hungarian Competition Law Research Centre, HU
  • Herbert Smith LLP
  • Howrey LLP
  • HOTREC Hotels, Cafes and restaurants in Europe
  • IBA, International Bar Association
  • ICC, International Chamber of Commerce
  • IMEDIPA, Institute for Studies in Competition Law and Policy, GR
  • Justizministerium Baden-Württemberg, DE
  • LIDC, Ligue Internationale du Droit de la Concurrence
  • Linklaters LLP
  • Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, Munich, DE
  • NERA, Economic Consulting
  • OFT, Office of Fair Trading
  • Office for the Protection of Competition of the Czech Republic, CZ
  • Studienvereinigung Kartellrecht
  • Which?, UK
  • White & Case LLP

II.Bertelsmann and Sony Corporation of America v Impala

15 July, 2008

Right at the time when I started to write the second part of my entry on Bertelsmann and Sony Corporation of America v Impala, I found an overview by WilmerHale published yesterday. The auhtors suggest that ”

The ECJ’s judgment is significant in a number of respects. Most importantly, it emphasizes that the “Statement of Objections” (SO) is only a provisional procedural document in competition cases and does not carry any evidentiary weight of its own. The ECJ clarifies that the Commission abandoning its objections in light of the parties’ response should not be cause for increased judicial scrutiny, but rather is compatible with the SO’s very purpose of ensuring the rights of defense. These pronouncements not only restore the previous procedural dynamics to EC merger reviews, but also limit the potential for the misuse of SOs in other contexts, for example by plaintiff lawyers in private cartel follow-on actions.

In addition, the ECJ has for the first time endorsed in substance the CFI’s Airtours criteria for determining collective dominance, although it uses slightly different language and emphasizes the need to avoid mechanically applying the three factors in the Airtours test.

In institutional terms, the judgment is a rare example of the ECJ overruling the CFI in a competition case. Coupled with the ECJ not following Advocate General Kokott’s opinion recommending upholding the CFI’s judgment, this may signal that the ECJ has a greater willingness to take a more active role in competition cases at least when fundamental issues such as rights of defense are at stake.

If you want to get an idea about the judgement quickly just read the comment by WilmerHale.

Comparative overview of fine setting in plenty of jurisdictions

13 July, 2008

I know for many this might not be new, but I just came across it: It is an interesting reading I think.

Setting of fines for cartels in ICN jurisdictions. Report to the 7th ICN Annual Conference Kyoto April 2008. International Competition NetworkCartels Working Group Subgroup 1 – general framework.