The EUCJ Intel decision is a reminder that European competition law looks different from that of the North American jurisdictions where economic effects drive enforcement policy and a tradition of due process and procedural fairness exists. Intel suggests limits to DG Competition’s enforcement with regard to due process and is a wake-up call for DG Competition to reiterate its commitment to procedural fairness.
Although there is some gap as between North American and European views on economic effects in cases, Intel suggests that this gap may be narrowing. Intel provides a roadmap for further reworking of European case law towards more of an effects based approach. Perhaps Intel offers European competition law a GTE Sylvania-like moment with regard to an effects based approach to conduct, where cases had hereunto been form based “by object.”
Featured News
South Korea’s Antitrust Regulator Greenlights K-Pop Powerhouse Deal
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Exxon’s Pioneer Purchase Approved, Former CEO Barred from Board
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Colorado Senate Rejects Bill Barring Rent-Setting Algorithms
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Bayer Faces US Antitrust Suit Over Pet Meds Competition
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Landmark Monopoly Trial Between DOJ and Google Wraps Up
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI