Market design powers of the European Commission? : remedies under Articles 7 and 9 Regulation 1/03 /: remedies under Articles 7 and 9 Regulation 1/03. (2020)

• Record Type: Book
• Further Information: Note: Korbinian Reiter.
• Other Names: Reiter, Korbinian
• Contents: Intro -- Preface -- Contents -- Chapter 1: Introduction -- 1.1 Delimitation of the Subject Matter -- 1.1.1 Distinction from Other Means to Enforce Articles 101 and 102 TFEU -- 1.1.2 Distinction from Similar Powers in the Fields of Anti-dumping, State Aid and Article 106 TFEU -- 1.1.3 Distinction from Merger Remedies -- 1.1.4 No Comparative Study -- 1.1.5 No Study of General Usefulness of Remedies, nor of Political or Economic Expediency -- 1.2 Terminology -- 1.2.1 Remedy -- 1.2.2 Structural and Behavioural Remedies -- 1.3 The Importance of Soft-Law -- 1.4 Outline -- Bibliography Chapter 2: Prolegomena -- 2.1 Fundamentals Regarding Article 7 and Article 9 as Legal Bases for the Adoption of a Remedy -- 2.1.1 Article 7 -- 2.1.2 Article 9 -- 2.1.3 Distinction of the Article 9 Procedure from the Settlement Procedure in Cartel Cases -- 2.2 The Alrosa Case and Its Criticism -- 2.2.1 The Case -- 2.2.1.1 The Facts -- 2.2.1.2 The Judgment of the General Court -- 2.2.1.2.1 Violation of Article 9 and the Principle of Proportionality -- 2.2.1.2.2 Violation of Alrosaś Rights of Defence -- 2.2.1.3 The Opinion of Advocate General Kokott 2.2.1.3.1 Violation of Article 9 and of the Principle of Proportionality -- 2.2.1.3.1.1 Too Strict Proportionality Test -- 2.2.1.3.1.2 Excess of the Limits of Judicial Review -- 2.2.1.3.2 Violation of Alrosaś Rights of Defence -- 2.2.1.4 The Judgment of the Court of Justice -- 2.2.1.4.1 Violation of Article 9 and of the Principle of Proportionality -- 2.2.1.4.1.1 Too Strict Proportionality Test -- 2.2.1.4.1.2 Excess of the Limits of Judicial Review -- 2.2.1.4.2 Violation of Alrosaś Rights of Defence -- 2.2.2 Essential Criticism and Preliminary Comment 2.2.2.1 Summary of the Criticism Regarding the Modified Proportionality Test -- 2.2.2.2 Comment -- 2.2.2.2.1 The Judgment Is Generalisable Only to a Limited Extent -- 2.2.2.2.2 The Modification of the Proportionality Test Applied by the Court Raises at Most Limited Concerns Regarding the Inte ... -- 2.2.2.2.2.1 Interests of Concerned Undertakings -- 2.2.2.2.2.2 Interests of Third Parties -- 2.2.2.2.2.3 Interest of the General Public in the Protection of the Competitive Process -- 2.2.2.2.3 Intermediate Conclusion on the Modification of the Proportionality Test in the Alrosa Judgment 2.3 The Broader Context: The Development of the Commissionś Practice and the Explanations for the Frequent Occurrence of Comm ... -- 2.3.1 Development of the Practice: A Shift Towards a ``Culture of Consent?́́ -- 2.3.1.1 Empirical Observations -- 2.3.1.1.1 Regarding Commission Decisions -- 2.3.1.1.2 Regarding Court Procedures -- 2.3.1.2 A Change of Paradigm? -- 2.3.2 Explanations for the Frequent Occurrence of Commitment Decisions -- 2.3.2.1 Incentives and Disincentives for a Commitment Decision -- 2.3.2.1.1 Incentives
• Publisher Details: Berlin, Germany : Springer
• Publication Date: 2020
• Extent: 1 online resource (578 pages)
• Subjects: 346.407; Commercial law -- European Union countries; Commercial law; European Union countries; Electronic books
• Languages: English
• ISBNs: 9783662607114; 3662607115; 9783662607121; 3662607123; 9783662607138; 3662607131
• Related ISBNs: 9783662607107; 3662607107
• Notes: Note: Includes bibliographical references.; Note: Print version record.
• Access Rights: Legal Deposit; Only available on premises controlled by the deposit library and to one user at any one time; The Legal Deposit Libraries (Non-Print Works) Regulations (UK).
• Access Usage: Restricted: Printing from this resource is governed by The Legal Deposit Libraries (Non-Print Works) Regulations (UK) and UK copyright law currently in force.