The Increasing (Ab)use of Commitments in European Antitrust Law: Stockholm Syndrome
Stefano Grassani, Mar 28, 2013
If an “EU antitrust hot topic of the month” award were to be attributed for March 2013, the prize would certainly go to the issue of commitments pursuant to article 9 of Regulation 1/2003, which made the front page of most antitrust newswires and blogs thanks to two notable cases.
Featured News
Google Challenges US Order to Share Search Data With Competitors
Oct 26, 2026 by
CPI
Visa, Mastercard Face Potential £5 Billion UK Class Actions Over Card Payment Fees
Oct 26, 2026 by
CPI
NCAA Faces Antitrust Lawsuit Over Division III Scholarship Restrictions
Oct 26, 2026 by
CPI
Google’s Play Store Antitrust Case Heads to South Korea’s Top Court
Oct 26, 2026 by
CPI
Thailand Tightens Payment Rules to Ease Cash Crunch for Small Firms
Oct 26, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Exclusive Dealing
Oct 25, 2026 by
CPI
Exclusive Dealing Without Exclusivity: Screening Contracts, Loyalty Rebates, and the Limits of Antitrust Tests
Oct 25, 2026 by
David Martimort & Jérôme Pouyet
When Competition for Exclusivity Raises Prices: Rebates, Pricing Rules, and the Insulin Puzzle
Oct 25, 2026 by
Daniel P. O’Brien & Greg Shaffer
Why Leaving the Door Open Can Be (Much) Worse Than Closing It: Share-Based Requirements, Buyer-Specific Costs, and Foreclosure
Oct 25, 2026 by
Zhijun Chen & Greg Shaffer
Antitrust Chronicle® – EU Merger Guidelines
Oct 19, 2026 by
CPI