Facts are chiels that winna ding*

more+
less-

I. Introduction - This essay reflects on how facts are established for purposes of European competition cases, how these facts are tested when they are inconsistent or disputed, and what improvements might be made. After noting some early characteristics of the Brussels enforcement regime, I describe the means currently available to gather facts, and will note that the Commission is armed with wide, effective and intrusive powers of enquiry, which it uses vigorously. I have picked a few examples of factual controversies to illustrate fact-handling problems (not to re-argue whether the outcome was right on the merits). What should we conclude from the fact that one competition authority or court decides one way, and another reaches a quite different factual conclusion? Both cannot be right, and divergences suggest that different procedures may lead to different outcomes.

In the concluding section, I suggest that as there is a spectrum of different situations where competition law is enforced, ranging from non- confrontational mergers to condemnations and severe punishments, so fact-finding processes could be calibrated to the needs of each situation.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Written by:

more+
less-

White & Case LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×
Loading...
×
×