
EU and US Antitrust Arbitration
Description
Alles über E-Books | Antworten auf Fragen rund um E-Books, Kopierschutz und Dateiformate finden Sie in unserem Info- & Hilfebereich.
The perspectives of the arbitrator and the in-house "user" of arbitration are included. Two chapters outline and explain US antitrust law and EU antitrust law with special reference to matters particularly likely to arise in arbitration. One chapter is devoted to ICC antitrust arbitrations and another to the emerging area of EU State aids in arbitration. There are industry-specific chapters, such as on telecommunications and pharmaceuticals, and much else. In this substantial book, practitioners will find helpful and easy-to-understand guidance to their questions on antitrust arbitrations.
More details
Other editions
Additional editions

Content
- Cover
- Half Title Page
- Title Page
- Copyright Page
- Summary of Contents
- Table of Contents
- About the Authors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- Part I General
- Chapter 1 Arbitrability of Antitrust Law from the European and US Perspectives
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. SOME PRELIMINARIES
- A. GENERAL TREND IN COMPARATIVE LAW TOWARDS THE ADMISSION OF A GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF ARBITRABILITY OF DISPUTES TOUCHING UPON MANDATORY RULES
- 1. Trend towards the Expansion of Arbitrability
- 2. Examples of the Expansion of Arbitrability
- 3. Defining Arbitrability
- a. Various Approaches
- b. Critique
- c. Expansion of Arbitrability
- d. Restrictions on Arbitrability
- e. Exclusive Jurisdiction of State Courts
- B. ARBITRATORS' DUTY TO RAISE ARBITRABILITY ISSUES ON THEIR OWN MOTION
- 1. General
- 2. Arbitrator's Duties
- a. Duty to Treat Parties Equally and to Render a Valid Award
- b. Duty to Make Best Efforts to Reach an Enforceable Award
- 3. Antitrust Arbitrability
- a. General Admission of Antitrust Arbitrability
- b. The Arbitrator's ex officio Duty to Raise Competition Law Issues
- C. SANCTION FOR DISREGARDING NON-ARBITRABILITY PROVISIONS: THE FAVOR ARBITRANDUM
- 1. Under the NYC
- 2. Restrictive Interpretation of Grounds of Annulment based on Non-arbitrability
- D. THE LAW APPLICABLE TO ARBITRABILITY
- 1. General
- a. Considerations of the Forum
- b. Relevant Criteria for Determining the Applicable Law
- 2. Pursuant to International Conventions
- a. The NYC
- b. The Geneva Convention
- c. The Model Law
- 3. The Transnational Concept of Arbitrability
- 4. Choice of Law in Arbitration Proceedings
- a. General
- b. Various Methods Available to the Arbitral Tribunal
- i. The Law Governing the Arbitration Agreement
- ii. The Law Applicable to the Main Contract
- iii. Transnational Rules
- iv. The Law of the Seat
- v. The Law of the Place of Enforcement
- vi. Relevance of the Effects Doctrine
- III. ANTITRUST ARBITRABILITY IN THE UNITED STATES AND IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
- A. GENERAL ADMISSION OF THE ARBITRABILITY OF ANTITRUST DISPUTES
- 1. General
- B. ANTITRUST ARBITRABILITY IN THE UNITED STATES
- 1. Arbitrability Affirmed
- a. Mitsubishi and Its Antecedents
- b. Mitsubishi and Choice-of-Law Provisions
- c. The US Supreme Court's Reasoning in Mitsubishi
- 2. Treble and Punitive Damages
- a. Fines and criminal sanctions
- b. Civil Law Consequences
- c. Non-compensatory Damages
- i. Treble or Punitive Damages
- ii. Arbitrability of Treble Damages
- iii. Conditions for the Application of Treble Damages by Arbitrators
- iv. Arbitrability of Exemplary Damages
- v. Conditions for the Application of Exemplary Damages by Arbitrators
- vi. Arbitrability of Punitive Damages
- C. ANTITRUST ARBITRABILITY IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
- 1. The French Experience
- a. Early Developments
- b. Confirmation of Antitrust Arbitrability by the French Courts
- 2. Other Countries
- a. Switzerland
- b. Italy
- c. Germany, England, The Netherlands, Sweden and Belgium
- d. New Zealand and Australia
- e. Conclusion
- D. ANTITRUST ARBITRABILITY IN EU LAW
- 1. Historical Background
- a. Traditional Reluctance
- b. Commission Precedents
- 2. General Admission of the Arbitrability of Antitrust Claims in EU Law
- a. Arbitration and the Privatization of Antitrust Enforcement
- i. The General Admission of the Arbitrability of Competition Law
- ii. The Impact of Modernization
- b. Arbitration in Remedies Disputes
- i. Arbitration Commitments under Article 101(3) TFEU Exemption and Article 9 Commitment Decisions
- ii. Arbitration Commitments in EC Merger Control
- iii. Conclusion
- 3. An Ongoing Debate
- a. General
- b. The Preliminary Ruling Mechanism
- i. The ECJ's Judgment in Nordsee Deutsche Hochseefischerei GmbH v. Reederei Mond Hochseefischerei Nordstern AG (hereinafter 'Nordsee')
- ii. Impact on Arbitrability
- iii. Conclusion
- c. Monitoring of Arbitral Proceedings by the Commission
- i. The Nisser/Blanke Proposition
- ii. A Critique of the Nisser/Blanke Proposition in the Light of Antitrust Arbitrability
- d. Intrusive Review of Awards as a Trade-off for Antitrust Arbitrability?
- i. Intrusive Review
- ii. No Intrusive Review
- iii. Implications of Antitrust Arbitrability and Limited Review of Awards
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- TABLE OF OTHER AWARDS
- Chapter 2 Arbitration Clauses and Competition Law
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE ASSESSMENT OF ARBITRATION CLAUSES FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COMPETITION LAW
- III. THE INCLUSION OF COMPETITION LAW WITHIN THE MATERIAL SCOPE OF ARBITRATION CLAUSES
- IV. STRATEGY IN DRAFTING ARBITRATION CLAUSES IN VIEW OF COMPETITION LAW ISSUES ARISING
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 3 Arbitrating Competition Law Issues: The Arbitrator's Perspective
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. COMPETITION-LAW-SPECIFIC CONSIDERATIONS FROM THE ARBITRATOR'S PERSPECTIVE
- A. JURISDICTIONAL QUESTIONS
- 1. Antitrust Arbitrability
- 2. Scope of the Arbitration Agreement
- 3. Unlawful Arbitration Agreements
- 4. Exemption Decisions
- B. APPLICABLE STANDARDS
- 1. Choice of Law and Mandatory Norms
- a. General
- b. The modern approach
- 2. Party Control over Arguments Deployed
- C. RESOLVING COMPETITION-LAW-SPECIFIC ISSUES
- 1. Document Production and Legal Privilege
- 2. Expert Evidence
- 3. Assistance with EU (Competition) Law
- 4. Assistance from Competition Authorities
- 5. Consistency with Other Decisions
- D. AWARD AND REMEDIES
- 1. The Reasoned Award
- 2. Damages and Punitive Damages
- 3. Awards by Consent
- III. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 4 Arbitrating Competition Law: The User's Perspective
- I. INTRODUCTION
- A. COMPETITION LAW AND THE ROLE COMPETITION PLAYS
- B. EFFECTIVENESS: MAKING ARBITRATION DELIVER
- C. THE ARBITRABILITY OF COMPETITION LAW TODAY
- D. MODERNIZATION OF EU COMPETITION LAW
- II. COMPETITION LAW ISSUES IN ARBITRATION
- A. ARBITRATION OF COMPETITION ISSUES RESULTING FROM CONTRACTUAL DISPUTES
- B. COMPETITION LAW ISSUES AND THE COMMISSION
- C. CAN THE USER BE COMPELLED TO ARBITRATE COMPETITION ISSUES?
- 1. The ARD and the easyJet Cases
- 2. The Microsoft Judgment
- a. The Parties' Respective Cases
- b. The CFI's Ruling
- 3. Arbitration versus Monitoring Trustee
- III. THE USERS AND THEIR REASONS FOR CHOOSING ARBITRATION
- A. WHO ARE THE USERS?
- B. EXPECTATIONS AND PERCEPTIONS OF THE USERS OF ARBITRATION
- 1. Avoidance of the Other Party's Courts
- 2. Institutional or Ad Hoc Arbitration
- 3. Applicable Law
- 4. Place of Arbitration
- 5. Confidentiality
- a. General
- b. Confidentiality in Antitrust Arbitrations
- i. Reporting Requirement
- ii. Interpretation and Information Requests to the Commission
- iii. The Commission's Involvement as Amicus Curiae
- iv. Review and Publication of the Award
- 6. Legal Privilege
- 7. Tailor-Made Procedures and Experience of the Arbitrators
- a. General
- b. Competition: Relevant Considerations
- i. Investigatory Powers and Production of Evidence
- ii. Power to Grant Individual Exemptions under Article 101(3) TFEU.
- 8. Time and Cost
- IV. CONCLUSIONS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 5 Burden and Standard of Proof in Competition Law Matters Arising in International Arbitration
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION
- A. GUIDANCE AVAILABLE TO THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL
- B. THE TREATMENT OF BURDEN OF PROOF IN THE ABSENCE OF BINDING APPLICABLE NORMS
- C. THE STANDARD OF PROOF
- D. EVIDENTIAL PRESUMPTIONS
- III. BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF IN COMPETITION LAW
- A. US ANTITRUST
- B. EU COMPETITION LAW
- 1. Burden of Proof in EU Competition Law Applied by Member State Organs
- 2. Standard of Proof in EU Competition Law Applied by EU Member State Organs
- IV. BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF IN COMPETITION CASES IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION
- A. GENERAL
- B. BURDEN OF PROOF
- C. WHAT IS THE STANDARD OF PROOF REQUIRED FOR COMPETITION MATTERS ARISING IN ARBITRATION?
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- Chapter 6 EU Competition Law Arguments in International Arbitration: Practical Steps and Strategic Considerations
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. BRINGING EU COMPETITION LAW ARGUMENTS IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
- A. POTENTIAL EU COMPETITION LAW ISSUES IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
- B. STRATEGIC CONSIDERATIONS ON WHETHER TO RAISE EU COMPETITION LAW ARGUMENTS IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
- 1. Reasons for not Advancing EU Competition Law Arguments at All
- 2. Advancing EU Competition Law Arguments in Support of a Particular Interpretation of a Possibly Anticompetitive Provision/Agreement
- 3. Advancing EU Competition Law Arguments to Avoid Being Bound by a Provision or Agreement: the 'Euro Defence'
- 4. Summary: Practical and Strategic Considerations for Raising EU Competition Law Arguments in the Course of Arbitration Proceedings
- C. OPTIONS IN PARALLEL TO ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
- 1. General
- 2. Challenging Validity of an Agreement and other Remedies in the National Courts of an EU Member State
- a. Arbitrability of EU Competition Law Issues
- b. Stay of Arbitration Proceedings and Interim Injunctions
- 3. Formal Complaints to the European Commission or NCAs
- a. General
- b. Persuasiveness of Competition Authority Decisions
- c. Stay of the Arbitration Proceedings Pending a Decision
- d. Putting Pressure on the other Party
- 4. Seeking Information and Opinions from the European Commission or NCAs
- a. Reasons for Cooperation
- b. Cooperation between the Arbitration Tribunal and the Competent Competition Authorities
- i. Circumstances in which an Arbitration Tribunal may Approach an NCA
- ii. Willingness of Competition Authorities to Cooperate
- III. RAISING EU COMPETITION LAW ISSUES AT THE ANNULMENT OR ENFORCEMENT STAGE OF AN AWARD
- A. GENERAL
- B. ARTICLE 101 TFEU AS PUBLIC POLICY RAISED AT THE ANNULMENT STAGE
- 1. EU Competition Law Neither Raised by the Parties nor Considered by the Arbitration Tribunal Motu Proprio
- a. The French Experience
- b. Strategic Advice
- 2. EU Competition Law Applied but Decision Manifestly and Obviously Wrong
- 3. EU Competition Law Applied but Award Contrary to European Commission or NCA Decision in Relation to Same Agreement
- a. Award Contrary to European Commission Decision
- b. Award Contrary to NCA Decision
- C. ANNULMENT: COURTS OUTSIDE THE EU
- 1. General
- 2. The Swiss Courts
- 3. Courts Outside Europe
- D. RESISTING ENFORCEMENT
- 1. Importance of the New York Convention
- 2. Within the EU
- 3. Outside the EU
- a. General
- b. The Swiss Courts
- c. Courts outside Europe
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- Chapter 7 The Use of Economic Evidence in Competition Law Arbitrations
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. REASONS FOR RESTRICTED USE OF ECONOMICS IN COMPETITION LAW ARBITRATIONS
- A. MIX OF CASES
- B. THE IMPORTANCE OF MARKET DEFINITION IN MERGER AND NON-MERGER CASES
- 1. Merger Cases
- a. Calculation of Market Shares and Concentration Indices
- i. The HHI
- ii. The Hypothetical Monopolist Test
- 2. Market Definition in Non-merger Cases
- a. Article 82 EC [102 TFEU] Market Definition Cases
- i. The Hypothetical Monopolist Test
- ii. Current versus Competitive Price Level
- b. Article 81 [101 TFEU] Market Definition Cases
- C. SPECIALISTS VERSUS NON-SPECIALISTS
- 1. Economic Speciality of Competition Authorities
- a. General
- b. The Commission and Member State Authorities
- 2. Economic Non-speciality of Arbitrators
- a. Risk of Technical Economic Evidence in Arbitrations
- b. Burden of Education
- III. TYPES OF ECONOMIC ANALYSIS SUITED TO COMPETITION LAW ARBITRATIONS
- A. ARTICLE 81 EC [101 TFEU] ISSUES
- 1. General
- a. The Competition Counterfactual
- b. Horizontal versus Vertical Relationship between Firms
- 2. Horizontal Relationships
- a. Harm Theories in Horizontal Relationships
- b. The Issue of Substitutability
- i. General
- ii. Fact versus Extent of Substitutability
- iii. Different Approaches to Assess the Extent of Substitutability
- iv. Likely or Actual Harm to Consumers
- 3. Vertical Relationships
- a. General
- i. What is a complement?
- ii. The Nature of Competition for Complements
- b. Harm Theories in Vertical Relationships
- i. The 'Input Foreclosure' Theory
- ii. The 'Customer Foreclosure' Theory
- c. The Role of Economics
- i. Articulation of the Theory of Harm
- ii. Understanding the Parties' Incentives
- 4. Efficiency Issues
- a. General
- b. Passing on Efficiencies
- c. Eliminating competition
- B. ARTICLE 102 TFEU/MONOPOLIZATION ISSUES
- 1. Type of Disputes: Access Pricing
- 2. The Role of Economics
- a. Determining Dominance
- i. General
- ii. Relevant Factors
- b. Available Methods for Determining the Access Price
- i. Cost-Based Pricing
- ii. Nondiscriminatory Pricing
- iii. Retail Minus Pricing
- iv. FRAND
- c. Choice of Appropriate Access-Pricing Approach
- d. Implementation of the Chosen Access-Pricing Approach
- i. Implementation of the Cost-Based Approach
- ii. Implementation of the Nondiscriminatory Pricing Approach
- iii. Implementation of the Retail-Minus-Pricing Approach
- iv. Implementation of FRAND Pricing Approach
- C. DAMAGES
- 1. General
- a. Restitutionary Damages
- b. Estimating Damages by Reference to the Counterfactual
- c. Methods for Estimating the Counterfactual
- i. Situation before or after the Infringement
- ii. Situation in a Similar Market
- iii. Empirical Estimates Using Econometric (Statistical) Methods
- iv. Cost-Based Estimate of Prices
- v. Theoretical Oligopoly Model
- 2. Econometric Approach
- a. General
- b. Example
- c. Caveats
- 3. Nonempirical Approach
- a. Availability of 'Reality Checks'
- i. Lost Profits without Entry Barriers
- ii. Variable Market Shares
- iii. Strong Competition in Relevant Market
- iv. Maverick Firm Competing on Price
- b. Direct Estimation of Damages
- 4. Passing-on Defence
- a. General
- b. Significance of Passing-On
- c. The Use of Econometrics
- IV. CONCLUSIONS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 8 Effective Use of Economic Experts in International Arbitration: Counsel's Role and Perspective
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. WHEN TO CALL AN ECONOMIC EXPERT
- A. 'REGULATORY' ARBITRATIONS
- 1. Follow-on Regulatory Arbitrations
- 2. Access Remedies
- B. BREACH OF CONTRACT
- 1. Determination of Liability
- 2. Quantification of Damages
- C. COMPETITION LAW ISSUES IN COMMERCIAL ARBITRATIONS
- 1. Competition Violations Raised as a Claim or a Defence
- 2. 'Rule-of-Reason' Approach
- a. Need for Economic Evidence in 'Horizontal' and 'Vertical' Cases
- b. Nature of Economic Evidence Required
- c. Need for Experts
- III. RELEVANT ASPECTS OF INTERNATION ALARBITRAL PROCEDURE
- A. DISCOVERY
- 1. The Common-Law Approach
- 2. The Civil-Law Approach
- 3. The International Arbitration Synthesis
- B. RULES OF EVIDENCE
- 1. The Common-Law Approach
- 2. The Civil-Law Approach
- 3. The International Arbitration Synthesis
- C. PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
- 1. The Common-Law Approach
- 2. The Civil-Law Approach
- 3. The International Arbitration Synthesis
- IV. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE USE OF ECONOMISTS IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION
- A. SELECTION OF THE ECONOMIC EXPERT
- B. WORKING WITH THE EXPERT DURING THE ARBITRAL PROCESS
- 1. Early Cooperation with the Expert
- 2. Limited Discovery
- C. PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
- 1. Level of Panel Expertise
- 2. The Expert's Objectivity
- 3. Demonstrative Evidence
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 9 The Role of the Expert Witness in Antitrust Arbitrations
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. PRELIMINARIES
- A. GENERAL
- B. THE NEED FOR EXPERTISE
- 1. The Need for Expert Evidence
- 2. The Nature of the Required Expertise
- a. General
- b. Specific
- i. EU Competition Law
- ii. US Antitrust Law
- 3. Selecting a Suitable Expert
- a. General
- b. Party- versus Tribunal-Appointed Experts
- c. A Single Joint Expert
- C. INSTRUCTING THE EXPERT
- 1. The Expert's Mandate
- a. General
- b. Duties and Responsibilities of the Expert
- c. Remedies against a Defaulting Expert
- 2. Instructions to the Expert
- a. Form and Content
- b. Duties and Responsibilities of Instructing Lawyer/Client to the Expert
- c. Expert's Acceptance of the Instructions
- III. THE EXPERT'S REPORT AND THE HEARING
- A. THE EXPERT'S REPORT
- 1. Type of Report
- 2. Form and Content
- a. General
- b. Specific
- 3. Style and Presentation
- 4. Legal Status and Evidentiary Value
- 5. Expert's Power to Request Disclosure and Power of Inspection
- 6. Narrowing the Issues between the Parties and Pre-hearing Settlement Opportunities
- B. THE HEARING
- 1. General
- 2. Expert Witness Conferencing
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF AWARDS
- Chapter 10 The Supranational Dimension of Arbitrating Competition Law Issues within the EU
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE MAIN ISSUES: THE PUBLIC/PRIVATE DIVIDE, PARTY AUTONOMY AND ENFORCEABILITY
- A. GENERAL
- B. THREE MAIN ISSUES
- 1. The Main Issue (I): The Public/Private Divide
- 2. The Main Issue (II): The Party Autonomy Rule
- 3. The Main Issue (III): Enforceability under the New York Convention
- a. Member State Supervisory Court Review and Eco Swiss
- b. A Literal Reading of Eco Swiss in Context
- c. Practical Application of the Literal Reading in Eco Swiss
- III. THE FOUNDATIONS OF SUPRANATIONAL ARBITRATION
- A. GENERAL
- B. THE VARIOUS MEANINGS OF 'SUPRANATIONAL'
- 1. The Meaning of 'Supranational' (I): The Historical Mandate of the European Union
- 2. The Meaning of 'Supranational' (II): The European Union Public Interest
- 3. The Meaning of 'Supranational' (III): The Constitutional Setup of the Community/Union Legal Order
- a. Independent Community/Union Institutions and Autonomous Decision Making
- b. Implementation and Supervision of Decisions
- c. Separate and Autonomous Legal Order
- i. The Doctrine of Direct Effect
- ii. The Doctrine of Supremacy
- iii. State Liability
- iv. Obligations of Private Parties under EU (Competition) Law
- C. THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF SUPRANATIONAL ARBITRATION AND THE SUPRANATIONAL ARBITRATOR
- 1. High Level of Technicality of the Proceedings
- 2. Involvement of the European Commission
- a. Request for Interpretation to the Commission
- b. Binding Interpretations by the Commission
- c. Request for Information to the Commission
- d. The Commission's Role as Amicus Curiae
- e. General Reporting Requirement to the Commission
- 3. Finality of the Award
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Part II EU Competition Law
- Chapter 11 The Essentials of EU Competition Law for Arbitration Practitioners
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. MARKET DEFINITION
- A. DEFINING THE RELEVANT MARKET
- 1. The Importance of Defining the Relevant Market
- 2. Defining the Relevant Market
- a. The Relevant Product Market
- b. The Relevant Geographic Market
- c. The Appropriateness of the SSNIP Test
- 3. Market Share
- B. COMPETITION RULES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
- 1. Objectives of EU Competition Law
- a. Consumer Welfare
- b. Protecting Competitors or the Competitive Process
- c. Market Integration
- 2. Sources of EU Competition Law
- a. Primary Legislation
- b. Secondary Legislation
- c. The Role of the Guidelines of the Commission
- d. Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and the Relationship between Them
- 3. Extraterritoriality
- a. Guidelines on the Effect on Trade
- b. The ECJ's View
- 4. Enforcement of Competition Law
- a. The European Commission
- b. The European Competition Network (ECN)
- c. The European Courts
- i. The General Court
- ii. The ECJ
- III. ARTICLE 101 TFEU
- A. INTRODUCTION
- 1. Article 101 TFEU: The Text
- B. THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN INFRINGEMENT OF ARTICLE 101 TFEU
- 1. Nullity pursuant to Article 101(2) TFEU
- 2. Investigation, Detection, and Penalties by the European Commission and the National Competition Authorities
- a. The Commission's Powers under Regulation 1/2003
- b. The NCAs Powers under Regulation 1/2003
- 3. Damages and Other Private Proceedings
- C. SOME PRELIMINARY ISSUES UNDER ARTICLE 101(1) TFEU
- 1. 'Agreement', 'Decision', and 'Concerted Practice'
- a. Meaning of Agreement
- b. Decisions by Associations of Undertakings
- c. Concerted Practices
- 2. 'Undertakings'
- a. Meaning
- b. Some Issues Relating to the Qualification as 'Undertaking'
- i. Individuals
- ii. Undertakings That Form a Single Economic Entity
- iii. Undertakings Related by Succession
- 3. Object or Effect of Preventing, Restricting, or Distorting Competition
- a. Agreements That Restrict Competition By Object
- b. Agreements That Restrict Competition by Effect
- 4. 'Appreciable' Effect on Competition
- 5. The Effect on Trade between Member States
- a. Significance and Meaning of 'Interstate Trade'
- b. The Test
- c. 'Appreciable' Effect on Trade
- D. EXEMPTION UNDER ARTICLE 101(3) TFEU
- 1. Background
- a. Direct Applicability: The Implications of Regulation 1/2003
- i. Block Exemptions
- b. Individual Exemption
- c. Burden of Proof
- 2. Conditions for the Application of Article 101(3) TFEU
- a. Improvement in the Production or Distribution of Goods or in Technical or Economic Progress
- b. Fair Share to Consumers
- c. Indispensability of the Restrictions
- d. Restrictions Must Not Substantially Eliminate Competition
- E. TYPES OF POTENTIALLY RESTRICTIVE AGREEMENTS
- 1. 'Horizontal' Agreements
- a. Background
- b. Common Restrictive Horizontal Agreements and Their Assessment under Article 101 TFEU
- i. Price-Fixing Agreements
- ii. Market or Customer Sharing Agreements
- iii. Output Restrictions: Limitation or Control of Production
- iv. Collusive Tendering
- v. Information-Sharing Agreements
- vi. Restrictions on Advertising and Promotion
- c. Horizontal Cooperation Agreements
- i. Commission's Guidelines on Horizontal Cooperation Agreements
- ii. Research and Development Agreements
- iii. Production Agreements
- iv. Purchasing Agreements
- v. Other Types of Cooperation Agreements
- 2. 'Vertical' Agreements
- a. Background
- b. Article 101(3) TFEU and Vertical Agreements
- i. Block Exemptions and the Commission's Guidelines on Vertical Restraints
- ii. The Application of Article 101(3) TFEU to Agreements that Do Not Satisfy the Block Exemption
- c. Methodology of Assessment of Vertical Agreements
- d. Common Vertical Agreements
- i. Agency Agreements
- ii. Export Bans
- iii. Single-Branding Objections
- iv. Tying Agreements
- v. Exclusive Distribution Agreements
- vi. Selective Distribution Agreements
- vii. Resale Price Maintenance, Recommended and Maximum Resale Prices
- viii. Franchise Agreements
- ix. Subcontracting Agreements
- IV. ARTICLE 102 TFEU
- A. INTRODUCTION
- B. ARTICLE 102 TFEU: THE TEXT
- C. CONSEQUENCES OF INFRINGEMENT OF ARTICLE 102 TFEU
- 1. Powers of the European Commission and the NCAs to Investigate and Impose Penalties
- 2. Damages and Other Private Proceedings
- D. CONDITIONS FOR THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 102 TFEU
- 1. 'One or More Undertakings'
- 2. Dominant Position
- a. When Is an Undertaking 'Dominant'?
- b. The Relevance of Market Shares
- c. Other Market Factors Indicating Dominance
- i. The Market Position of Other Competitors
- ii. Barriers to Entry
- iii. Buyer Power
- d. Single and Collective Dominance
- 3. Dominant Position within a Substantial Part of the Common Market
- 4. 'Abuse of a Dominant Position'
- a. Background
- i. Dominant Firms' Special Responsibility to Protect Competition
- ii. Exploitative versus Exclusionary Abuses
- b. Exploitative Abuse
- c. Exclusionary Abuse
- i. Background
- ii. Market Foreclosure
- iii. Price-based and Non-price-Based Exclusionary Abuses.
- d. Abuse of Collective Dominance
- 5. Effect on Trade between Member States
- a. Articles 101 and 102 TFEU
- b. Approach under Article 102 TFEU
- 6. Other Issues
- a. Dominance, Abuse, and Effects of Abusive Conduct can be in Different Markets
- b. Objective Justifications and Efficiencies: A Possible Defence
- E. TYPES OF ABUSIVE CONDUCT
- 1. Background and Terminology
- 2. Main Types of Abusive Non-pricing Practices
- a. Exclusive Purchasing Obligations
- i. Background
- ii. English Clauses
- iii. De facto Exclusivity
- b. Tying and Bundling
- i. Background
- ii. Assessment under Article 102 TFEU
- c. Refusal to Supply
- i. Background
- ii. Prohibition under 102 TFEU
- iii. Refusal to License Intellectual Property Rights
- d. Unfair and Discriminatory Trading Practices
- e. Other Non-pricing Abusive Practices
- 3. Main Types of Abusive Pricing Practices
- a. Rebates
- b. Excessive Pricing
- c. Predatory Pricing
- d. Price Discrimination
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- COMMISSION DECISIONS
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- Chapter 12 Arbitration and EU Competition Law in the Post-Modernization Era
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE EU COMPETITION LAW ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM
- A. THE OLD SYSTEM OF ENFORCEMENT AND THE ROLE OF NATIONAL COURTS AND ARBITRATORS
- 1. The Administrative Authorization and Notification System
- a. Competition Law Enforcement in Europe
- b. Enforcement Systems
- 2. Competence of National Civil Courts (and Arbitrators) under the Old System
- a. The Principle of Direct Effect
- b. The Application of Article 101(3) TFEU under the Old System
- c. Competence of Arbitrators under the Old System
- B. THE NEW LEGAL EXCEPTION SYSTEM
- 1. The Passage to the System of Legal Exception
- a. The 1999 White Paper
- b. The System of Legal Exception
- c. Regulation 1/2003
- 2. The New Role of the National Courts
- III. THE RISE OF EU PRIVATE ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT
- A. THE UNDERDEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT IN EUROPE
- 1. General
- 2. Private Enforcement and Modernization
- 3. Private Enforcement in Europe - The Main Issues
- B. RELEVANT ECJ CASE LAW
- 1. General
- a. Procedural Autonomy and Limits
- b. EU Law Remedies
- 2. Courage v. Crehan
- a. Background
- b. The Facts
- c. The ECJ's Ruling and the EU Right to Damages
- 3. Manfredi v. Lloyd Adriatico
- a. Background
- b. The Conditions of the EU Law Remedy
- c. Conditions of Standing
- d. Nature and Extent of Recoverable Damages
- i. Recovery of Loss of Profit and Interest
- ii. Punitive Damages
- e. Limitation Periods
- C. THE COMMISSION GREEN AND WHITE PAPERS ON DAMAGES ACTIONS
- 1. The Ashurst Study
- 2. The 2005 Green Paper on Damages Actions
- a. General
- b. The Commission's Main Proposals
- i. Discovery
- ii. Collective Claims
- iii. Interaction with Leniency
- iv. Punitive Damages
- v. Passing-On and 'Indirect Purchaser' Standing
- 2. The 2008 White Paper on Damages Actions
- a. General
- b. The Commission's Main Proposals
- i. General
- ii. Standing
- iii. Passing-On
- iv. Collective Claims
- v. Interaction with Leniency
- 3. National Case Law and Next Steps
- IV. MODERNIZED EU COMPETITION LAW AND ARBITRATION
- A. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EU COMPETITION LAW AND ARBITRATION
- 1. Initial Distrust
- 2. The New Approach
- 3. Modalities of Competition Law Issues in Arbitration
- B. THE POWER OF ARBITRATORS TO APPLY EU COMPETITION LAW
- 1. Arbitrability of EU Competition Law
- a. Arbitrability in General
- b. The Special Case of the Arbitrability of Antitrust-Related Tort Claims
- 2. Competences of Arbitrators in the Decentralized System of Enforcement
- a. Arbitration and Regulation 1/2003
- b. Arbitrators' Competence under Article 101(3) TFEU
- i. Application of Article 101(3) TFEU by Arbitrators
- ii. Textual Arguments for the Application of Article 101(3) TFEU by Arbitrators
- iii. Other Arguments
- c. The Withdrawal of the Benefit of a Block Exemption
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- Chapter 13 The Basis for Applying EU Competition Law from a Continental Perspective
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. SOME PRELIMINARIES
- A. THE ARBITRATOR'S MANDATE
- B. MANDATORY RULES OF THE LEX ARBITRI
- C. EC COMPETITION LAW AS A MANDATORY NORM
- III. THE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATOR AND THE NORMS APPLICABLE TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE
- A. THE ARBITRATORS FREEDOM TO DETERMINE THE NORMS APPLICABLE TO THE MERITS
- B. THE PARTIES' LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS
- 1. Methods for Determining the Applicable Law
- a. The Three Principal Methods
- i. The Cumulative Method
- ii. The General Principles Method
- iii. The Voie Directe Method
- b. The Common Objective: The Parties' Legitimate Expectations
- i. The Cumulative and the General Principles Method
- ii. The Voie Directe Method
- 2. The Will of the Parties versus the Parties' Legitimate Expectations
- a. The Actual Will of the Parties
- b. The Parties' Expectations when EU Competition Law Applies
- i. Status of EU Competition Law in the Legal Systems of the Member States
- ii. A Special Case: No Dispute About EU Law Applicability
- IV. THE LAW APPLICABLE TO THE MERITS
- A. WHERE THE LAW OF A EU MEMBER STATE IS APPLICABLE TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES' AGREEMENT
- 1. General
- a. Hypothetical Case Study
- i. Application of the UNCITRAL Rules
- ii. Application of the ICC Rules
- 2. The Importance of the Lex Contractus
- a. General
- b. Determining the Lex Contractus
- 3. The Importance of the Will of the Parties
- a. Arbitrator's Duties
- i. Parties' Decision to Exclude Public Policy Rules
- ii. Public Policy Rules
- b. The Application of Mandatory Rules and EU Competition Law
- i. Mandatory Rules
- ii. EU competition law
- B. WHERE THE PARTIES HAVE NOT AGREED THAT THE LAW OF AN EU MEMBER STATE IS APPLICABLE TO THE MERITS
- 1. The Parties Have Ignored the Issue of the Applicable Law
- a. General
- b. The Impact of the Lex Arbitri and Applicable Arbitration Rules
- c. The Application of EU Competition Law Independently from Any Lex Contractus
- i. Determination of the Lex Contractus as a Consequence of the Applicability of a Mandatory Norm
- 2. The Lex Contractus Chosen by the Parties is not the Law of a Member State
- a. General
- b. ICC Practice
- c. The Parties' Legitimate Expectations
- d. The Will of the Parties
- 3. The Parties Have Agreed that the Merits of the Case Are to be Decided According to a non-Member State Law
- a. General
- b. Arbitrators as Guardians of Transnational Public Policy
- c. The Will of the Parties
- i. General
- ii. Illicit Evasion of EU Competition Law
- iii. Resignation of the Arbitrator
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- Chapter 14 The Basis for Applying Competition Law from an English Law Perspective
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. COMPETITION LAW IN ENGLAND AND ITS ENFORCEMENT
- A. COMPETITION LAW IN ENGLAND
- B. ENFORCEMENT OF COMPETITION LAW
- III. ARBITRATORS' JURISDICTION TO ARBITRATE COMPETITION-LAW-RELATED MATTERS
- A. CAN AN ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DEAL WITH COMPETITION-RELATED MATTERS?
- B. IS IT A COMPETITION ISSUE THAT THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL CAN DETERMINE?
- IV. IS COMPETITION LAW MANDATORY LAW AND WHEN SHOULD IT BE APPLIED?
- A. IS COMPETITION LAW MANDATORY LAW?
- B. WHEN SHOULD COMPETITION LAW BE APPLIED?
- V. WHAT SHOULD ARBITRATORS DO WHEN FACED WITH A COMPETITION RELATED DISPUTE?
- A. DOES AN ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL HAVE A DUTY TO APPLY COMPETITION LAW?
- B. SHOULD ARBITRATORS APPLY COMPETITION LAW EX OFFICIO?
- C. WHEN SHOULD AN ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL DECLINE JURISDICTION, IF AT ALL?
- D. SHOULD ARBITRATORS GO ON TO DETERMINE THE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES?
- E. WHAT REMEDIES CAN THE ARBITRATORS AWARD?
- VI. COMPETITION LAW AND CHALLENGES TO ARBITRAL AWARDS
- A. SCOPE FOR AND LIMITS TO JUDICIAL REVIEW
- B. GROUNDS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW IN ENGLAND
- VII. COMPETITION LAW AND CHALLENGES TO ARBITRAL AWARDS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- Chapter 15 The Application of EU Competition Law in International Arbitration in Switzerland
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. MANDATORY NORMS
- III. APPLICABLE LAW IN SWISS INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION
- A. LEGAL BASIS OF LAW APPLICABLE BY ARBITRATORS IN SWITZERLAND
- 1. Case Law
- 2. Legal Literature
- IV. THE STANCE OF ARBITRATORS SITTING IN SWITZERLAND AS REGARDS THE APPLICATION OF EU COMPETITION LAW
- V. THE APPLICATION OF EU COMPETITION LAW AS MANDATORY NORMS
- VI. THE MECHANICS OF DETERMINING THE APPLICATION OF EU COMPETITION LAW AS MANDATORY NORMS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 16 The Ex Officio Application of European Competition Law by Arbitrators
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE FUNDAMENTAL IMPORTANCE OF ECO SWISS AND ITS PROGENY
- A. PROCEDURAL HISTORY OF ECO SWISS
- 1. The Case
- 2. The Arbitration Proceedings
- 3. The Proceedings before the Dutch Courts
- a. Annulment of the Awards and Application for a Stay before the District Court of The Hague
- b. Appeal Proceedings Re Application for a Stay before the Court of Appeal of The Hague
- c. The Proceedings before the Hoge Raad
- i. Issues before the Hoge Raad
- ii. Position of Article 101 TFEU in the Dutch Legal System
- iii. The Preclusive Effect of the Partial Final Award
- iv. The Hoge Raad's Preliminary Reference to the ECJ
- 4. The Proceedings before the ECJ
- a. The ECJ's Answer to the Second Question
- b. The AG's Opinion on the First, Second, and Third Questions
- i. The First Question
- ii. The Second Question
- iii. The Third Question
- c. The ECJ's Answer to and the AG's Opinions on the Fourth and Fifth Questions
- d. Summary
- 5. Conclusion of the Proceedings before the Dutch Courts following the ECJ's Ruling
- B. EXAMINATION OF THE ECJ'S FINDINGS IN ECO SWISS
- 1. The Second Look
- a. General
- b. The Principal Notions of Eco Swiss
- i. General
- ii. State Control over Arbitration Proceedings
- iii. The Scope and the Intensity of the Second Look
- c. Conceptual Perplexities of the Second Look
- i. The Procedural Character of the National Remedy
- ii. Risk of Relitigation
- iii. The Mission of the Second Look
- 2. Nordsee
- a. Arbitral Tribunal's Power to Make Preliminary References under Article 267 TFEU
- b. The Uniform Interpretation of Community Law
- c. Indirect Preliminary References
- 3. Van Schijndel
- a. General
- b. The Facts and Proceedings before the Dutch Courts
- c. The ECJ's Ruling
- 4. Eco Swiss and the Tripwires of Dutch Civil Procedure
- 5. Manfredi
- a. General
- b. Contextual Reading of Manfredi
- III. THE ARBITRATOR'S EX OFFICIO APPLICATION OF EUROPEAN COMPETITION LAW IN THEORY
- A. THE PERSPECTIVE OF PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW
- 1. The Determination of the Lex Causae by the Arbitrator
- a. Where Valid Choice of Law by the Parties
- b. Where No Valid Choice of Law by the Parties
- 2. The Role of Mandatory Rules of Law
- a. Mandatory Rules of the Lex Causae
- b. Internationally Mandatory Rules
- 3. Application in the Context of European Competition Law
- a. Mandatory Application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU
- b. Shortcomings of the Private International Law Perspective in its Application to the Arbitration of European Competition Law
- 3. Conclusion
- B. THE DUTY TO PRODUCE A HEALTHY ARBITRAL AWARD
- 1. General
- 2. The Relevant Curial Laws
- 3. The Second Look in Annulment and Leave for Enforcement Actions
- a. The Importance of the Second Look and the Public Policy Concept
- b. The Scope of the Public Policy Concept for Purposes of the Second Look
- c. The Arbitrator's Resulting Legal Duty to Apply European Competition Law Ex Officio
- 4. The Arbitrator's Duty to Render an Enforceable Award
- a. Source of the Arbitrator's Duty to Render an Enforceable Award
- b. Consequences for the Arbitrator in Case of Noncompliance
- c. Shortcomings of the Duty to Render an Enforceable Award
- C. THE INSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE
- 1. General
- 2. Interim Conclusion
- IV. PROCEDURAL ISSUES FOR THOSE WHO ARE NOT AFRAID OF THE SECOND LOOK
- 1. General
- 2. The Arbitrator's Duty to Respect his Mandate versus the Arbitrating Parties' Legitimate Expectations
- 3. The Impact of the Second Look
- a. The Arbitrator's Powers Where the Parties Are Silent on Potential Competition Law Issues
- b. Broadening the Arbitrator's Mandate
- 3. Parties' Refusal to Arbitrate Competition Law Issues
- 4. Practical Examples of the Ex Officio Application of European Competition Law by Arbitrators
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 17 Remedies in Arbitration for EU Competition Law Violations
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE BASES UPON WHICH ARBITRATORS MAY GIVE EFFECT TO EU COMPETITION LAW
- III. THE REQUIREMENTS OF EU LAW IN RELATION TO REMEDIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF EU COMPETITION LAW
- IV. THE APPLICATION OF EU COMPETITION LAW BY INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATORS
- V. ISSUES RELATING TO THE LAW ON REMEDIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF EU COMPETITION LAW
- A. GENERAL
- B. NULLITY AND SEVERABILITY
- C. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
- D. DAMAGES CLAIMS
- 1. Commission Policy
- 2. The Extent of Damages
- E. RESTITUTION
- VI. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 18 Provisional Measures in Competition Law Matters before Arbitrators
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. JURISDICTION
- A. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ('MANDATE IN ABSTRACTO')
- B. PARTIES' AGREEMENT ('MANDATE IN CONCRETO')
- III. ROLES OF SPECIAL AGENCIES
- IV. CONFLICTING RULES
- V. PROCEDURAL RULES TO BE APPLIED
- VI. MATERIAL RULES TO BE APPLIED
- VII. ESTABLISHING THE FACTS
- VIII. VIOLATIONS ESTABLISHED
- IX. HEARING OF OTHER PARTIES AND RIGHTS OF INTERVENTION
- X. FORUM SHOPPING
- XI. ENFORCEABILITY OF THE INTERIM ARBITRAL AWARD OR ORDER
- XII. CONCLUSIONS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 19 Provisional Measures Concerning Competition Law in International Arbitration
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. INTERIM MEASURES AND ARBITRATION
- A. DEFINITION OF PROVISIONAL RELIEF
- B. ARBITRATORS' POWER TO ORDER PROVISIONAL MEASURES
- C. THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL'S POWERS OVER INTERIM MEASURES DO NOT EXCLUDE THE POWER OF THE COURTS TO GRANT INTERIM RELIEF
- D. THE GENERAL TEST FOR PROVISIONAL MEASURES TO BE APPLIED BY THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL
- III. COMPETITION LAW AND INTERIM MEASURES
- A. PLURALITY OF SOURCES OF POWER TO ORDER PROVISIONAL RELIEF IN COMPETITION LAW MATTERS
- B. THE TEST FOR PROVISIONAL MEASURES ORDERED BY THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION
- C. THE TEST FOR PROVISIONAL MEASURES IN EU MEMBER STATE COURTS
- D. THE TEST FOR PROVISIONAL MEASURES ORDERED BY US COURTS IN GOVERNMENT-INITIATED COMPETITION CASES
- E. THE TEST FOR PROVISIONAL MEASURES ORDERED BY US COURTS IN PRIVATE COMPETITION CASES
- F. THE TEST FOR PROVISIONAL MEASURES ORDERED BY ARBITRAL TRIBUNALS IN COMPETITION CASES
- IV. CONSIDERATIONS RELEVANT TO THE DETERMINATION OF WHERE TO APPLY FOR PROVISIONAL MEASURES IN COMPETITION LAW MATTERS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- Chapter 20 Authority and Influence in Arbitrations of Previous Decisions on EU Competition Law
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. TAXONOMY OF DECISIONS ON EU COMPETITION LAW
- A. INTRODUCTION
- B. TAXONOMY OF EU COMPETITION LAW DECISIONS
- 1. Infringement Decisions
- 2. Fining Decisions
- 3. Block Exemptions
- 4. Commitments Decisions
- 5. Other Settlements
- 6. Interim Measures
- 7. Non-infringement Decisions
- 8. Case Closures
- 9. Opinions and Informal Guidance
- 10. Decisions under Article 13(1) of Regulation 1/2003
- 11. Other Procedural Decisions
- III. AUTHORITY IN ARBITRATIONS OF PREVIOUS DECISIONS ON EU COMPETITION LAW
- A. METHODOLOGY
- B. RELEVANCE
- C. NON-BINDING ACTS
- D. DECISIONS
- 1. The Position of the Addressees
- a. Option I: Article 288 TFEU
- i. The Scope of the Binding Effect on the Addresses
- ii. Binding Effect in Proceedings before EU National Courts
- iii. Binding Effect in Arbitration under Article 288 TFEU
- b. Option II: Purely a Matter of Evidential Weight?
- c. Option III: Duty to Render an Enforceable Award
- d. Option IV: Abuse of Process
- 2. The Position of Parties Other than the Addressees
- a. The TWD Point
- i. Preclusive Effect on Third Parties
- ii. The TWD Case
- iii. EU Case Law on Third Party Standing under Article 263 TFEU
- iv. Effect of Previous Decisions on Third Parties in Arbitration
- b. The Crehan Point
- i. Effect of Previous Decisions Relating to Different Parties
- ii. Outline of the Crehan Case
- iii. The English High Court Judge's Approach
- iv. The English Court of Appeal's Approach
- v. Crehan in the House of Lords
- vi. The Position in Arbitration
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF DECISIONS
- Chapter 21 Assistance by the European Commission and Member States Authorities in Arbitrations
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. REGULATION 1/2003 AND COOPERATION MECHANISMS WITH COURTS
- A. GENERAL SPIRIT OF COOPERATION
- B. THE COOPERATION BETWEEN THE COMMISSION AND NATIONAL COURTS
- 1. The Right of Courts to Seek the Commission's Assistance
- 2. The Duty to Transmit Copies of National Judgments to the Commission
- 3. The Amicus Curiae Mechanism
- III. ARBITRATION AND REGULATION 1/2003
- 1. Inapplicability of the Cooperation Mechanisms of Regulation 1/2003 to Arbitration
- 2. No Duty to Transmit to the Commission Arbitral Awards
- 3. Arbitration and the Amicus Curiae Mechanism
- IV. ARBITRATION AND THE COOPERATION NOTICE
- A. GENERAL EXCLUSION OF ARBITRATION FROM THE COOPERATION NOTICE
- B. APPLICATION OF THE COOPERATION NOTICE BY ANALOGY BY ARBITRATORS
- C. A NOTICE ON COOPERATION WITH ARBITRATORS?
- D. INDIRECT CHANNELS OF COOPERATION
- E. COOPERATION WITH ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS SITTING OUTSIDE THE EU
- V. CONCLUSIONS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 22 Court Review of Competition Law Awards in Setting Aside and Enforcements Proceedings
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE REVIEW OF ARBITRAL AWARDS FOR REASONS HAVING TO DO WITH THE MERITS
- III. PUBLIC POLICY
- IV. COMPETITION LAW AS A COMPONENT OF PUBLIC POLICY
- A. DOMESTIC COMPETITION LAW
- B. EU COMPETITION LAW
- C. THE COMPETITION LAW OF THIRD COUNTRIES
- V. THE NATURE AND THE EXTENT OF THE REVIEW OF AWARDS: THE 'MAXIMALIST' AND THE 'MINIMALIST' VIEWS
- A. THE REASONS IN FAVOUR OF AN IN-DEPTH REVIEW OF THE MERITS OF AWARDS RAISING COMPETITION LAW ISSUES
- B. THE REASONS IN FAVOUR OF A RESTRICTED REVIEW OF AWARDS RAISING COMPETITION LAW ISSUES
- 1. The Presumption of Deference to the Solution of the Arbitrators
- 2. In-Depth Review of Awards Does Not Guarantee the Respect of Public Policy
- 3. A Restrained Review of Awards Is Compatible with Effective Competition Law Enforcement
- VI. THE CASE LAW ON THE REVIEW OF AWARDS INVOLVING COMPETITION LAW
- A. THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE
- B. THE CASE LAW OF THE MEMBER STATES
- 1. The Case Law in Favour of a Restrained Review
- 2. The Case Law in Favour of an In-Depth Review
- VII. THE STANDARD OF REVIEW
- A. TOWARDS A CONSENSUS
- B. EU COMPETITION LAW
- C. WHICH INFRINGEMENTS OF COMPETITION LAW QUALIFY AS BREACHES OF PUBLIC POLICY?
- 1. Only Concrete, Effective and Serious Infringements
- 2. The Practical Implications
- D. THE NATURE OF THE SCRUTINY OF THE AWARD BY THE REVIEWING COURT
- 1. The Scrutiny Should be Genuine But Restrained
- 2. The Scrutiny Should Concentrate Principally on the Award and its Reasoning
- 3. Exceptional Situations That May Require Going Beyond the Reasoning
- 4. The Appropriate Degree of Scrutiny of Awards by Courts
- VIII. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 23 EU Member State Court Application of Eco Swiss: Review of the Case Law and Future Prospects
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. RELEVANT CASE LAW
- A. ECO SWISS
- 1. The Factual Background
- 2. Preliminary Reference under Article 267 TFEU
- 3. The ECJ's Ruling
- B. OTHER CASE LAW
- 1. National Case Law
- a. Dirland v. Viking
- b. Thalès v. Euromissiles
- c. MDI Marketing v. Van Raalte
- d. OPAP v. I.S.A.
- e. Schlumberger v. Nuovo Pignone
- f. SNF v. Cytec
- g. Terra Armata v. Tensacciai
- h. Cytec v. SNF
- 2. Relevant Case Law of the ECJ before and after Eco Swiss
- a. Relevant Cases before Eco Swiss
- i. Nordsee - No preliminary ruling under Art. 267 TFEU
- ii. Marc Rich - The Arbitration Exception under the Brussels Convention/Regulation
- b. Relevant cases after Eco Swiss
- i. Mostaza Claro v. Centro Movil - Consumer Contracts and Arbitration Clauses
- III. THE 'SECOND LOOK' FOR COMPETITION LAW AWARDS
- A. THE CONCEPT AND NOTION OF PUBLIC POLICY
- 1. Public Policy in Arbitration
- a. The Concept of Public Policy
- b. The Notion of Public Policy
- B. CRITERIA FOR COMMUNITY PUBLIC POLICY
- a. Mandatory Nature of Community Public Policy
- b. Article 3 EC [Articles 3, 4, 5, 6 TFEU] as a Yardstick for Community Public Policy
- c. Uniform Application of EU (Competition) Law
- d. Direct Effect
- e. Fundamentality
- C. THE ROLE OF STATE COURTS IN ARBITRATION
- 1. Procedural Autonomy
- a. Origin of the Concept
- b. Limits to Procedural Autonomy
- c. Role in Review of Competition Awards
- 2. Review Functions
- a. Minimum Review Standards
- b. The relevance of Renault v. Maxicar
- D. SCOPE OF COMPETITION PUBLIC POLICY
- 1. No Binding Criteria in Case Law
- 2. Defining the Public Policy Specific to EU Competition Law
- E. BEHAVIOUR OF THE PARTIES AND THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL
- 1. Behaviour of the Parties
- 2. Behaviour of the Arbitral Tribunal
- F. STANDARD OF REVIEW
- 1. General
- 2. 'Minimalist' versus 'Maximalist' Review
- a. Main Propositions
- i. Minimalist Review
- ii. Maximalist Review
- iii. Proposed Compromise
- b. Critical Assessment
- i. The Principle of Finality
- ii. Suitability of Courts for Review on the Merits
- iii. True Motive for Review
- iv. Brussels Convention Cases
- IV. CONCLUSIONS
- A. SCOPE OF EU PUBLIC POLICY
- B. SCOPE OF COURT REVIEW
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 24 EU Member State Court Experience in Applying EU Competition Law under Modernization
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. OVERVIEW OF EU COMPETITION LAW APPLICATION BY NATIONAL COURTS
- A. INTRODUCTION
- B. GOALS OF PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT AND RELATION TO PUBLIC ENFORCEMENT
- C. THE LEGAL BASIS FOR PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT
- III. KEY ISSUES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE ENFORCEMENT
- A. STANDING: WHO CAN BRING A CLAIM?
- 1. Representative and Collective Actions
- a. General
- b. Representative Actions and Consumer Claims
- c. Acquisition of Claims
- d. Mass Settlement
- 2. Costs and Funding Claims
- a. General
- b. Cost Capping
- c. Contingency Fees
- d. Conditional Fees
- e. Legal Aid
- f. Third-Party Funding
- B. JURISDICTION: WHERE CAN THE CLAIM BE BROUGHT?
- 1. Choice of Forum
- a. General
- b. EU Defendants
- c. Non-EU Defendants
- 2. Which Court?
- a. General
- b. Summary of the Systems in Various Member States
- 3. Scope for Forum Shopping?
- a. General
- b. Consolidating EU-Wide Claims in One Member State: The Provimi Case
- c. Challenging Jurisdiction: The SanDisk Case
- d. Pre-empting Choice of Jurisdiction
- 4. Limitation Periods
- a. General
- b. Limitation Periods in Various Member States
- C. PROOF OF INFRINGEMENT
- 1. Proof of Infringement in a Standalone Action
- a. General
- b. Discovery/Disclosure
- 2. Proof of Infringement in a Follow-On Action
- a. General
- b. EU Decisions
- c. National Decisions
- d. Precedential Value of Decisions in Similar Cases
- 3. Potential Sources of Evidence
- a. General
- b. Access to European Commission Case Files
- c. Access to NCA Case Files
- d. Use of Economic Evidence to Prove Infringement
- D. PROOF AND QUANTIFICATION OF DAMAGES
- 1. Causation
- 2. Quantification of Damages
- a. Which Damages Are Available?
- i. Compensatory Damages
- ii. Exemplary/Punitive Damages
- iii. Restitution
- iv. Interest
- b. How Are Damages Calculated?
- 3. Joint and Several Liability
- 4. The 'Passing-on Defence' and the Standing of Indirect Purchasers
- a. A Pair of Difficult Issues
- b. One Approach: The US Experience
- c. Member State Approaches
- 5. Availability of Interim Remedies
- IV. CONCLUSION: WHAT IS TO COME?
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 25 Parallel Proceedings before the Tribunal and the Courts/Competition Authorities
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THE COURTS/COMPETITION AUTHORITIES
- A. PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THE COURTS
- 1. Validity of the Arbitration Agreement
- 2. The Arbitrators Jurisdiction and the Kompetenz-Kompetenz Principle
- a. The Principle of Kompetenz-Kompetenz
- b. Wording of the Arbitration Agreement
- 3. Courts Staying Proceedings, Declining Jurisdiction, or Referring the Parties to Arbitration
- a. Under Article II(3) of the New York Convention
- b. Under Article 8 of United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Model Law
- 4. Anti-suit and Anti-arbitration Injunctions
- a. Anti-arbitration Injunctions
- b. Anti-suit Injunctions
- i. General
- ii. Antisuit Injunctions in Respect of Court Proceedings Pending in the EU or EEA States
- B. PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THE COMPETITION AUTHORITIES
- 1. Powers of the Courts in Competition Litigation
- 2. Powers of the Arbitral Tribunal in Competition Law Arbitrations
- 3. The Approach of the English Commercial Court in Lauritzencool AB v. Lady Navigation Inc.
- 4. A Structured Approach to the Discretion to Stay
- a. Overview
- b. Arbitration as an Effective Method of Dispute Resolution
- c. Effective Application of Competition Law
- d. Suitability of Arbitration for Competition Law Disputes
- 5. Applications for Stay: The Legal Framework
- a. Overview
- b. The Principle of Expedition
- c. The Duty to Render an Enforceable Award
- d. Party Autonomy
- e. Proposed Test for Stay of Arbitration
- III. USE OF EVIDENCE IN ARBITRATION
- A. USE OF EVIDENCE ADDUCED IN ARBITRATION FOR PUBLIC ENFORCEMENT
- 1. Role of Competition Authorities
- 2. Exercise of Investigatory Powers by Competition Authorities in Respect of Arbitration
- B. USE OF EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO OR OBTAINED BY COMPETITION AUTHORITIES IN ARBITRATION
- 1. The Problem
- 2. Production of Documents by the Party Having Access to the Evidence
- 3. Order for Production of Documents Submitted to the Competition Authority
- 4. Request by the Tribunal to the Competition Authority for Production of Documents
- 5. Testimony of Officials of the Competition Authority
- IV. REFERENCES TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE
- A. GENERAL
- B. NO POWER OF THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL TO MAKE A REFERENCE
- C. PRELIMINARY REFERENCES BY NATIONAL COURTS
- 1. Preliminary References in Arbitration-Related Court Proceedings
- 2. 'Indirect References' During the Arbitration
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 26 Arbitrating EU Competition Law in the Communications Sector in Europe
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. COMPETITION LAW IN THE COMMUNICATIONS SECTOR
- A. THE GEOGRAPHIC DIMENSION
- B. A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF COMMUNICATIONS REGULATION IN EUROPE
- C. COMMUNICATIONS REGULATION AND COMPETITION LAW
- D. THE RELEVANT AUTHORITIES
- III. ARBITRATING COMPETITION LAW IN THE SECTOR
- A. THE REGULATOR AS THE RESOLVER OF THE DISPUTE
- B. THE ROLE OF COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 27 Arbitrating Competition Law Matters in Pharmaceutical Markets
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. PHARMACEUTICAL MARKETS IN EUROPE
- A. PRICE SETTING BY THE STATE
- 1. Member State Measures
- 2. Consequences for Commercial Actors
- 3. Significance of Pharmaceutical Market Regulation for the Application of Competition Rules
- III. AGREEMENTS IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL SECTOR WHERE ARBITRATION MAY ARISE
- A. DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENTS
- 1. Relationship between Wholesalers and Manufacturers
- a. Organization of Distribution
- b. Distribution Agreements
- 2. Relationships between Consumers and Manufacturers
- 3. Hypothetical Case Study
- B. CARTELS
- 1. Collusion in the Pharmaceutical Industry
- 2. Relevance of Arbitration
- C. CO-PROMOTION AND CO-MARKETING AGREEMENTS
- 1. Definition
- 2. Potential Competition Concerns
- D. TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AGREEMENTS AND R&D AGREEMENTS
- 1. Technology Transfer
- 2. R&D Agreements
- E. TRADEMARK DISPUTES
- IV. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR ARBITRATORS APPLYING EU COMPETITION RULES IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF COMMISSION DECISION
- TABLE OF EU COMMISSION DECISIONS
- OTHER
- Chapter 28 Arbitrating EU State Aid Issues
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE POTENTIAL RELEVANCE OF THE EU STATE AID REGIME IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION
- A. GENERAL
- B. THE STATE AS A COMMERCIAL PARTY?: SOME DILEMMAS
- III. THE FUNDAMENTALS OF STATE AID
- A. THE DEFINITION OF STATE AID
- 1. General
- 2. The Cumulative Criteria of State Aid
- a. Transfer of State Resources
- b. State Resources and State Undertakings
- c. Imputability
- d. Economic Advantage
- e. Selectivity
- f. Effect on Competition and Trade
- B. COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES OF GENERAL ECONOMIC INTEREST
- 1. Operation of the Altmark Criteria
- 2. The Commission Block Exemption Decision on State Aid
- C. EXEMPTED STATE AID
- 1. Articles 107(2) and (3) TFEU
- a. Aid That Is Compatible with the CommonMarket - Article 107(2) TFEU
- b. Aid That May be Compatible with the Common Market - Article 107(3) TFEU
- 2. The General Block Exemption Regulation
- 3. Article 106(2) TFEU
- 4. The Financial Crisis: The Temporary Frameworks
- D. PROCEDURE FOR THE GRANTING, NOTIFICATION, AND EXEMPTION OF STATE AID
- 1. General
- 2. Existing Aid
- 3. New Aid
- E. RECOVERY OF UNLAWFUL AID
- 1. General Principles
- 2. Recovery and the National Courts
- 3. Legitimate Expectations
- 4. Recovery from a Subsequent Owner
- 5. Conclusion
- F. JUDICIAL REVIEW
- 1. The Scope of Community Court Review
- 2. The Role of the National Courts
- IV. THE SCOPE OF THE POWERS OF AN ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL IN STATE AID CASES
- A. TYPES OF AID WHICH ARE 'PER SE' ILLEGAL
- 1. Export Aid
- 2. Operating Aid
- 3. Other types of Aid
- B. COMMUNITY GUIDELINES ON DETERMINING WHETHER A PARTICULAR MEASURE IS AN AID
- 1. General
- 2. The Communication on State Guarantees
- a. General
- b. The Commission's 2008 Notice on State Guarantees
- 3. Direct Taxation
- 4. Infrastructure Aid
- a. General
- b. Preferential Access to Infrastructure
- 5. Public-Private Partnerships
- 6. Disposal of Public Land or Assets at Less Than Full Market Value
- 7. State Participation and the Market Economy Investor Principle
- a. General
- b. The MEIP and Public Undertakings
- C. DAMAGES AWARDS: CAN COMPENSATION AWARDS LEAD TO ILLEGAL STATE AID?
- 1. General
- 2. The Olympic Airways Case
- 3. Termination of Long-Term Contracts
- 4. Selected National Procedures
- a. The Latvian Gas Case
- b. The Dutch Stranded Asset Case
- 5. Relevant Precedents from Investment Arbitration
- a. Bilateral Investment Treaties
- b. ICSID Arbitration Rules and the Hungarian Power Purchase Contracts
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLES OF CASES
- TABLE OF COMMISSION CASES
- TABLE OF COMMISSION DECISIONS
- TABLE OF ARBITRATORS AWARD
- Chapter 29 Arbitrating Competition-Law-Related Issues under Articles 3(1)(b) TFEU, 4(3) TEU, and 106 TFEU
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE CONCEPT OF UNDERTAKING
- A. GENERAL
- 1. Definition
- 2. Application and Case Law
- B. SPECIFIC NOTIONS OF 'UNDERTAKING'
- 1. Government, State, or 'Public' Entities and Competition Law
- 2. Employees' Associations, Sickness Funds, and Hospitals
- C. INDIVIDUAL APPROACH AND ASSESSMENT OF COMPLEX BUSINESS STRUCTURES
- 1. Case-by-Case Approach
- 2. Assessment of Complex Business Structures
- D. APPLICATION BY ARBITRATORS AND SAFEGUARDS AGAINST ERRORS
- 1. Arbitrator's General Power to Apply the Concept of 'Undertaking'
- 2. Intervention of the Commission or NCAs on Request by Interested Third Parties
- III. RELEVANT SUBSTANTIVE LAWS
- A. THE NORM OF ARTICLES 3(1)(b) TFEU, 4(3) TEU, AND 101 OR 102 TFEU
- 1. Context and Formulation of the Norm
- a. General
- b. The ECJ's Approach in van Eyke v. Aspa
- i. The Test in van Eyke v. Aspa
- ii. Imposition of Cartels
- iii. Encouragement of Collusive Practices or Reinforcement of Their Effects
- iv. Delegation of Rule-Making Competences
- 2. Application of the Norm in National Legal Order
- a. The ECJ's Approach
- b. Where No Effect on Trade between Member States
- 3. Application of the Norm by Arbitrators
- B. ARTICLE 106 TFEU
- 1. Background
- 2. Article 106(1) TFEU
- a. Scope of Article 106(1) TFEU
- b. Granting of a Monopoly and the Responsibility of Undertakings
- c. Application of Article 101(1) TFEU by Arbitrators
- 3. Article 106(2) TFEU
- a. Scope of Article 106(2) TFEU
- b. Service of General Economic Interest
- i. Legislative Context
- ii. Distinction from Services of General Interest
- iii. Compatibility of Financial Compensation with State Aid Rules
- iv. Establishment of Public Service Obligations
- v. Application by Arbitrators
- c. Assignment of a Particular Task
- d. The Burden of Proof
- i. For Member States
- ii. For Undertakings
- e. Necessity and Proportionality
- f. Influence on the Development of Trade
- g. Special Accounting Requirements and Cross-Subsidization
- h. Application by Arbitrators of Article 106(2) TFEU
- 4. Article 106(3) TFEU
- a. Role of the Commission
- i. Power to Adopt Directives and Decisions
- ii. Adopted Decisions and Directives
- b. Availability of Judicial Review
- 5. State Compulsion
- a. General
- b. Application by Arbitrators
- c. Assessment of Conduct in Mixed Situations
- i. Joint Operation of Different Rules
- ii. Relevant Case Law and Five-Step Scheme
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF EU COMISSION DECISION
- OTHER
- Chapter 30 International Arbitration and ADR in Remedy Scenarios Arising under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE USE OF ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 101(3) TFEU
- A. THE WORKINGS OF ARTICLE 101(3) TFEU
- 1. The Old and New Exemption Regimes under Article 101(3) TFEU
- a. The Old Exemption Regime under Regulation 17/62
- b. The New Exemption Regime under Regulation 1/2003
- 2. The Workings of the Old Exemption Regime
- a. Negotiation of Behavioural Remedies
- b. 'Conditions and Obligations' under Regulation 17/62
- c. Public Law Sanctions for Breach of an Obligation under Regulation 17/62
- i. Revocation, Amendment of the Exemption Decision and Prohibitory Injunctions
- ii. Fines
- iii. Breach of a Condition under Regulation 17/62
- B. THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 101(3) TFEU PURSUANT TO REGULATION 17/62
- 1. General
- 2. The Commission's Motivation
- 3. The Commission's Supervisory Functions
- a. Requirement to Report to the Commission
- b. The Commission's Right to Take Further Action
- c. Consequences of Non-compliance with the Reporting Requirement
- 4. Enforceability of the Resulting Award
- C. ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION PROVISIONS USED IN COMMISSION EXEMPTION DECISIONS UNDER ARTICLE 101(3) TFEU PURSUANT TO REGULATION 17/62
- 1. General
- 2. The Commission's Practice of Arbitration under Regulation 17/62
- a. Arbitration Obligation versus Arbitration Option
- b. Duration of the Arbitration Obligation
- c. Scope of the Arbitration Obligation
- d. Tiered Dispute Resolution and Escalation Clauses
- e. Third-Party Notification
- f. Institutional versus Ad hoc Arbitration
- g. Place and Language of Arbitration
- h. Constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal
- i. Determination of the Applicable Substantive Law
- j. Reporting Requirement
- k. Expert Determination
- l. Burden of Proof and Prima Facie Evidence
- m. Documents-Only Arbitration
- n. Power to Take Interim Measures
- o. Reasoning of Final Award
- p. Deadline for Final Award
- q. Costs of the Arbitration and On-Account Payments
- 3. Conclusion
- D. TABLE ON THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF ARBITRATION IN EXEMPTION DECISIONS UNDER ARTICLE 101(3) TFEU PURSUANT TO REGULATION 17/62
- E. THE USE OF ARBITRATION UNDER EU BLOCK EXEMPTION REGULATIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 101(3) TFEU
- 1. The Workings of EU Block Exemption Regulations
- a. General
- b. Application of Arbitration
- 2. Relevant Block Exemption Regulations in Force
- a. Regulation 823/2000 Concerning Liner Shipping Companies
- i. General
- ii. Application of Arbitration
- b. Regulation 1400/2002 Concerning Motor Vehicle Distribution and Servicing
- i. General
- ii. Application of Arbitration
- 3. Expired Block Exemption Regulations
- a. Regulation 4056/86 Concerning Maritime Transport
- i. General
- ii. Application of Arbitration
- b. Regulation 2349/84 Concerning Patent Licensing
- i. General
- ii. Application of Arbitration
- c. Regulation 556/89 Concerning Know-How Licensing Agreements
- i. General
- ii. Application of Arbitration
- 4. ICC Arbitral Practice under EU Block Exemptions
- III. THE USE OF ARBITRATION AND ADR UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF REGULATION 1/2003
- A. THE WORKINGS OF ARTICLE 9 OF REGULATION 1/2003
- 1. General
- 2. Behavioural Remedies under Regulation 1/2003
- 3. Public Law Sanctions for Non-compliance
- a. Re-opening the Proceedings
- b. Fines and Periodic Penalty Payments
- 4. Enforceability of Article 9 Commitment Decisions before the Member State Courts, the Commission and an NCA
- 5. Cumulative Sanctions by the Commission and the Member State Courts
- B. THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF REGULATION 1/2003
- 1. General
- a. Arbitration in Access Commitments
- b. Similarities to EU-Merger-Remedy-Related Arbitrations
- c. Enforceability of the Arbitration Obligation
- i. Re-opening of the Proceedings and Article 7 Decision
- ii. Enforcement before the Member State Courts
- d. Enforceability of the Arbitration Award
- 2. The Commission's Recent Experience
- a. DaimlerChrysler, Toyota and Opel
- i. DaimlerChrysler
- ii. Toyota
- iii. Opel
- iv. Reservation of Third-Party Beneficiary's Right to Resort to a Local Court
- b. German Bundesliga
- 3. Principles for the award procedure
- C. THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION UNDER ARTICLE 9 OF REGULATION 1/2003
- 1. General
- 2. The Commission's Recent Experience of Mediation in Fiat
- a. Mediation Commitments as an Alternative to Arbitration
- b. The Mediation Commitment in Fiat
- 3. The Commission's Recent Experience of Expert Determination in SkyTeam
- a. Caveat
- b. Expert Determination Commitments as an Alternative to Arbitration
- c. The Expert Determination Commitment in SkyTeam
- i. General
- ii. The Expert Determination Mechanism: The Text
- iii. The Expert Determination Mechanism: Comments
- 4. The Commission's Recent Experience of Adjudication in Ship Classification
- a. Caveat
- b. Adjudication Commitments as an Alternative to Arbitration
- c. The Adjudication Commitment in Ship Classification
- i. General
- ii. The Adjudication Mechanism: The Text
- iii. The Adjudication Mechanism: Comments
- D. CONCLUSION ON THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF ARBITRATION AND ADR UNDER REGULATION 1/2003
- 1. Article 7 versus Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003
- 2. Arbitration versus ADR
- IV. THE USE OF ARBITRATION AND ADR UNDER ARTICLE 102 TFEU
- A. THE WORKINGS OF ARTICLE 102 TFEU
- 1. General
- 2. Behavioural Remedies under Article 102 TFEU
- B. THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF ARBITRATION UNDER ARTICLE 102 TFEU
- 1. The Commission's Experience of Arbitration under Article 102 TFEU
- 2. The Commission's Experience of Arbitration under Regulation 1/2003
- C. THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF EXPERT DETERMINATION UNDER ARTICLE 102 TFEU
- 1. General
- 2. The Commission's Recent Experience of Expert Determination in IMS Health
- 3. The Commission's Recent Experience of Expert Determination under Regulation 1/2003
- 4. Caveat: The Commission's Recent Experience of Monitoring Commitments in Microsoft
- a. General
- b. Application to remedy scenarios arising under Articles 81 and 82 EC [101 and 102 TFEU]
- D. CONCLUSION ON THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF ARBITRATION AND ADR UNDER ARTICLE 102 TFEU
- V. THE USE OF ARBITRATION BY THE NATIONAL COMPETITION AUTHORITIES
- A. GENERAL
- B. EXAMPLES FROM PRACTICE
- VI. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF EUROPEAN COMMISSION DECISIONS
- OTHERS
- Chapter 31 Arbitration and Criminal Liability for Competition Law Violations in Europe
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE RELEVANCE OF COMPETITION LAW VIOLATIONS TO ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
- A. THE APPARENT LACK OF INTERFERENCE BETWEEN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS DEALING WITH COMPETITION LAW VIOLATIONS AND ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS IN EUROPE
- B. THE POTENTIAL RELEVANCE OF CRIMINAL ANTITRUST PROCEEDINGS TO INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS IN EUROPE
- III. THE WIDE DIFFERENCES OF APPROACH TOWARDS THE SANCTIONING OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR COMPETITION LAW VIOLATIONS IN EUROPE
- A. THE ABSENCE OF CRIMINAL SANCTIONS OF COMPETITION LAW VIOLATIONS UNDER THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY TREATY [TFEU]
- B. THE IMPORTANCE OF CIVIL SANCTIONS FOR COMPETITION LAW VIOLATIONS AT THE EUROPEAN LEVEL SUPPORTED BY EXTRAORDINARY POWERS OF INVESTIGATION
- 1. The Importance of Administrative Fines at EU Level
- 2. The Broad Powers of Investigation at EU Level
- C. CRIMINAL SANCTIONS FOR COMPETITION LAW VIOLATIONS VARY CONSIDERABLY WHEN THEY EXIST AT STATE LEVEL
- 1. The Variety of Criminal Sanctions for Competition Law Violations in EU Member States
- 2. Criminal Sanctions for Competition Law Violations in European States which Do Not Belong to the EU
- D. THE IMPACT OF LENIENCY POLICIES FOR COMPETITION LAW VIOLATIONS IN EUROPE
- IV. THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS ON ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS DEALING WITH COMPETITION LAW VIOLATIONS
- A. THE POTENTIAL DELAY OR STAY OF ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS AS A RESULT OF PARALLEL CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
- B. THE POTENTIAL COOPERATION BETWEEN ARBITRATORS AND CRIMINAL COURTS INVESTIGATING A COMPETITION LAW VIOLATION
- C. SHOULD ARBITRATORS REPORT A COMPETITION LAW VIOLATION TO NATIONAL AUTHORITIES OR TO A CRIMINAL JUDGE?
- V. CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AS A BAR TO THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF AN AWARD
- A. STARTING CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS TO RESIST THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF AN ARBITRAL AWARD: THE SNF V. CYTEC CASE
- B. CONSEQUENCES OF A CRIMINAL COURT'S FINDING THAT AN AGREEMENT ASSESSED AS VALID IN AN ARBITRAL AWARD CONSTITUTES A CRIMINAL VIOLATION OF ANTITRUST LAWS
- VI. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF AWARDS
- Part III US Antitrust Law
- Chapter 32 The Essentials of US Antitrust Law for Arbitration Practitioners
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. ANTITRUST AND ARBITRATION IN CONTEXT
- A. GENERAL
- B. INITIATING ARBITRATION
- C. RELEVANT ANTITRUST LEGISLATION AND REGULATION
- III. RESTRAINTS OF TRADE
- A. SECTION 1 OF THE SHERMAN ACT
- B. CONTRACT, COMBINATION, CONSPIRACY
- C. RESTRAINT AFFECTS INTERSTATE OR FOREIGN COMMERCE
- D. RESTRAINT IS UNREASONABLE
- 1. General
- 2. Rule of Reason and Market Analysis
- a. Definition of the Rule of Reason
- b. Market Definition and Analysis
- i. Determination of the Relevant Product Market
- ii. Determination of the Relevant Geographic Market
- iii. Assessment of 'Market Power'
- c. Balancing Procompetitive and Anticompetitive Effects
- 3. The 'Quick Look'
- 4. Per Se Analysis
- E. HORIZONTAL RESTRAINTS
- 1. Price Fixing
- 2. Output Restrictions
- 3. Price Restraints Subject to the Rule of Reason
- 4. Allocation Agreements
- 5. Group Boycotts
- F. VERTICAL RESTRAINTS
- 1. Vertical Price Restraints
- a. Minimum Resale Price Maintenance
- b. Maximum Resale Price Maintenance
- 2. Vertical Non-price Restraints
- a. Exclusive Distribution
- b. Territorial and Customer Agreements
- c. Tying Arrangements
- d. Exclusive Dealing Arrangements
- IV. MONOPOLIZATION AND ATTEMPTED MONOPOLIZATION
- A. SECTION 2 OF THE SHERMAN ACT
- B. MONOPOLIZATION
- 1. Main Elements of the Monopolization Offense
- 2. Possession of Monopoly Power
- 3. Wilful Acquisition and Maintenance of Monopoly Power
- a. General
- b. 'Predatory' Conduct
- c. 'Exclusionary' Conduct
- d. 'Predatory and Exclusionary Conduct' - Examples
- C. ATTEMPTED MONOPOLIZATION
- 1. Main Elements of the Attempted Monopolization Offense
- 2. Specific Intent
- 3. 'Dangerous Probability of Success'
- V. ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT
- A. PRICE DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS UNDER THE ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT
- B. MAIN ELEMENTS OF A PRICE DISCRIMINATION CLAIM UNDER THE ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT
- 1. Standing and Requisite Cross-Border Element
- 2. Discrimination in Net Price
- 3. Substantial Competitive Injury
- C. MAIN DEFENSES
- 1. Section 2(b) Defenses
- 2. Section 2(a) Defenses
- 3. The 'Functional Availability Defense'
- VI. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 33 The Basis for Applying Antitrust Law from a US Perspective
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
- III. MITSUBISHI: THE HOLDING, THE DISSENT, AND THE ISSUES RAISED
- A. THE LITIGATION
- 1. The Background Facts
- 2. The Course of the Litigation
- B. THE MAJORITY OPINION OF THE US SUPREME COURT
- 1. Construction of the Arbitration Clause
- 2. Deconstruction of the American Safety doctrine
- C. THE DISSENT
- 1. Construction of the Arbitration Clause
- 2. Contractual versus Statutory Claims
- a. Section 2 of the FAA
- b. The Public Interest Objective of the Sherman Act
- c. Further Grounds for Unsuitability of Arbitration
- D. OTHER ISSUES RAISED BY THE COURT'S OPINION IN MITSUBISHI
- 1. Domestic versus International Arbitration
- 2. Choice of Law Excluding Antitrust
- 3. Supervisory Court Review
- IV. THE PROGENY OF MITSUBISHI
- A. APPLICABILITY TO DOMESTIC ARBITRATION
- B. SCOPE OF THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE
- C. WAIVER OF ANTITRUST REMEDIES
- D. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ARBITRATOR ERRORS
- 1. Judicial Review and Vacatur Pursuant to the FAA
- 2. Judicial Review of Arbitration Awards
- E. LIMITED DISCOVERY IN THE ARBITRAL PROCESS
- F. COMPLEXITY OF THE ANTITRUST ISSUES
- G. ARBITRATORS EXCEEDING THEIR POWERS
- H. ANTITRUST CLASS ACTIONS
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 34 The Arbitration of Antitrust Class Actions under United States Law
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. ANTITRUST CLASS ACTIONS IN THE US COURTS
- A. THE RATIONALE FOR CLASS ACTIONS
- B. THE CLASS CERTIFICATION PROCEDURE
- C. THE PROSECUTION AND SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTIONS
- III. THE ARBITRABILITY OF ANTITRUST CLASS ACTIONS
- A. GENERAL RULES ON THE ENFORCEMENT OF ARBITRATION CLAUSES
- B. WHEN DOES AN ARBITRATION CLAUSE AUTHORIZE A CLASS ACTION ARBITRATION?
- C. ARE CLASS ACTION WAIVER PROVISIONS ENFORCEABLE?
- 1. Is the Enforceability Issue for the Court or for the Arbitrator?
- 2. Enforceability: The 'Vindication of Statutory Rights' Argument
- 3. Enforceability: The Unconscionability Argument
- 4. Severability of a Class Action Waiver
- IV. THE CONDUCT OF CLASS ACTION ARBITRATIONS
- A. THE AAA SUPPLEMENTARY RULES FOR CLASS ARBITRATIONS
- B. STEPS IN THE ARBITRATION PROCESS
- 1. The Class Construction Award
- 2. The Class Determination Award
- 3. Notice to Class Members, Interventions, and Opt-out Procedures
- 4. The Final Award
- 5. Settlement, Voluntary Dismissal, or Compromise
- C. JUDICIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE ARBITRATION PROCESS
- 1. Securing Evidence and Witnesses
- 2. Review of Interim Rulings
- 3. Enforcement of the Award
- 4. Collateral Consequences of the Award
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 35 The Ex Officio Application of US Antitrust Law by Arbitrators
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. GENERAL ISSUES IN THE ARBITRATION OF ANTITRUST CASES IN THE UNITED STATES
- A. EXTENDED SCOPE OF EVIDENTIARY SEARCH
- 1. General
- 2. Discovery in Antitrust
- 3. Relevant Arbitration Rules
- a. General
- b. The US Federal Rules of Civil Procedures
- c. The IBA Rules
- 4. Applicable Law
- a. Section 7 of the Federal Arbitration Act
- b. Rule 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
- c. Service of Subpoenas Abroad
- B. REMEDIAL POWERS OF THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL
- 1. Damages
- a. Section 4 of the Clayton Act
- b. Applicability in the Arbitration Context
- 2. Injunctive Relief
- a. Section 16 of the Clayton Act
- b. Applicability in the Arbitration Context
- c. Competence of Arbitrators in US Antitrust Matters
- III. OTHER ISSUES POSED IN THE CONSIDERATION OF ANTITRUST ISSUES BY ARBITRATORS
- A. GENERAL
- B. ARBITRATOR'S DUTIES IN ANTITRUST ARBITRATIONS
- 1. Endeavour Properly to Adjudicate and Remedy
- 2. No Direction to Violate Antitrust Laws
- 3. Duty to Raise Antitrust Issues Ex Officio
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 36 Remedies in Arbitration for US Antitrust Violations
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. SOME PRELIMINARIES
- A. REMEDIES AVAILABLE IN ANTITRUST LITIGATION
- 1. Background
- 2. Relevant Legislation
- a. Monetary/Treble Damages
- b. Injunctive Relief
- c. Attorney's Fees and Costs
- B. ANTITRUST STANDING AND ANTITRUST INJURY
- 1. Antitrust Standing
- 2. Antitrust Injury
- 3. Applicability to Arbitration
- C. LIMITATIONS REGARDING PARTIES FROM WHICH ARBITRATION REMEDIES CAN BE SOUGHT
- 1. Parties Who May Be Sued in Arbitration
- a. General
- b. Closely Related Entities
- 2. Potential Issues Regarding the Fact That Not All Entities Can Be Brought Into Arbitration
- a. Duplicative Proceedings
- b. Enforcement of Arbitration Where Only Partial Recovery
- III. TYPES OF REMEDIES AVAILABLE IN ANTITRUST ARBITRATIONS
- A. GENERAL
- B. TREBLE DAMAGES
- 1. Mandatory Character in Arbitration
- 2. 'Punitive' versus 'Compensatory' Damages
- C. INJUNCTIVE RELIEF/EQUITABLE REMEDIES
- 1. General
- 2. Relevant Case Law Precedents
- D. PUNITIVE DAMAGES
- 1. In Non-antitrust Cases
- 2. In Antitrust Cases
- E. ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS
- F. PRE-ARBITRATION AND POST-ARBITRATION INJUNCTIONS
- 1. Pre-arbitration Injunctions
- a. Freezing the Status Quo
- b. Antisuit Injunctions
- 2. Post-arbitration Injunctions
- IV. CRIMINAL VERSUS CIVIL LAW ACTIONS
- V. COURT REVIEW OF ARBITRATION AWARDS
- A. GENERAL
- B. RELEVANT PRECEDENTS
- C. REMEDY-STRIPPING PROVISIONS
- 1. Competence of Court or Arbitrator to Review a Remedy-Stripping Provision
- a. General
- b. Relevant Precedents
- 2. Severability
- a. General
- b. Relevant Precedents
- VI. REMEDIES AVAILABLE INTERNATIONALLY AND EFFECT ON ARBITRABILITY
- 1. General
- 2. Relevant Antitrust Precedents
- VII. APPLICATION OF ANTITRUST TO INVALIDATE ARBITRATION AGREEMENT
- VIII CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 37 Interim Measures in Antitrust Matters before Arbitrators
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. COMMON INTERIM MEASURES IN THE UNITED STATES
- A. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIONS
- 1. Section 16 of the Clayton Act
- 2. Standard for Obtaining a Preliminary Injunctions
- 3. Taking Out Security
- B. SEIZURE OF PERSON OR PROPERTY
- 1. Available Provisional Measures
- 2. Attachment
- III. THE POWER OF ARBITRAL TRIBUNALS TO ORDER INTERIM RELIEF
- A. GENERAL
- B. ARBITRATION RULES
- 1. American Arbitration Association (AAA)
- 2. International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
- 3. International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR)
- 4. London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) Rules
- 5. United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Rules
- C. ENFORCEMENT OF INTERIM RELIEF ORDERED BY ARBITRATORS
- 1. Lack of Direct Powers of Enforcement
- 2. Alternative Powers of Enforcement
- 3. Section 9 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA)
- IV. THE ROLE OF THE COURTS IN INTERIM AND CONSERVATORY MEASURES
- A. INTERNATIONAL TREATIES AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION
- 1. The New York Convention
- 2. The US FAA
- B. CIRCUIT SPLIT
- 1. Courts Finding No Authority to Issue Interim Measures of Relief
- a. Under the NYC
- b. Under the FAA
- 2. Courts Finding Authority to Issue Interim Measures of Relief
- a. Criticism of McCreary
- b. Carolina Power & Light Co. v. Uranex
- c. The Progeny of Uranex
- i. Court-ordered Interim Relief under the NYC
- ii. Court-ordered Interim Relief under the FAA
- C. STATE LEGISLATION
- V. CHOOSING BETWEEN THE ARBITRATOR AND THE COURT WHEN SEEKING INTERIM MEASURES OF RELIEF
- A. CHOOSING THE COURT OVER THE ARBITRATOR
- 1. Prior to Formation of the Tribunal
- 2. After Formation of the Tribunal
- B. CHOOSING THE ARBITRATOR OVER THE COURT
- VI. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 38 The Effect of a Government Judgment on Subsequent Private Antitrust Actions
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. THE EFFECT OF A GOVERNMENT JUDGMENT ON SUBSEQUENT PRIVATE ANTITRUST LITIGATION IN THE UNITED STATES
- A. THE DOCTRINE OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL
- B. SECTION 5(a) OF THE CLAYTON ACT
- III. THE EFFECT OF A GOVERNMENT JUDGMENT ON SUBSEQUENT ARBITRATION OF ANTITRUST CLAIMS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 39 US Enforcement Issues and US Antitrust Law
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. WHICH ARBITRAL AWARDS ARE GOVERNED BY THE NEW YORK CONVENTION OR THE PANAMA CONVENTION IN THE UNITED STATES?
- A. THE NEW YORK CONVENTION APPLIES TO NONDOMESTIC ARBITRATION
- B. THE PANAMA CONVENTION MAY ALSO APPLY TO NONDOMESTIC ARBITRATION AND MAY TRUMP THE NEW YORK CONVENTION
- III. ONCE THE ARBITRAL AWARD IS GOVERNED BY THE NEW YORK (OR PANAMA) CONVENTION, WHAT ARE THE DEFENSES TO ENFORCEMENT AS SET FORTH IN THE CONVENTION?
- A. CHALLENGING THE AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE
- 1. Absence of a Valid Arbitration Agreement: Article V(1)(a)
- 2. Subject Matter not Arbitrable: Article V(2)(a)
- B. CHALLENGING THE ARBITRATION PROCEDURE
- 1. Improper Composition of the Arbitral Tribunal: Article V(1)(d)
- 2. Lack of a Fair Opportunity to be Heard: Article V(1)(b)
- C. CHALLENGING THE RESULTING AWARD
- 1. The Award or a Nonseverable Part of it Exceeds the Submission to Arbitrate: Article V(1)(c)
- 2. The Award is not Binding: Article V(1)(e)
- 3. Public Policy of the Forum - Article V(2)(b)
- a. Violations of US Public Policy Generally
- b. Arbitration Awards that Potentially Violate US Antitrust Laws may not Violate US Public Policy
- c. Choice-of-Forum and Choice-of-Law Clauses in International Transactions may Violate US Public Policy
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 40 Parallel Proceedings before the Arbitral Tribunal and the Courts
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. CATEGORIES OF PRIVATE ANTITRUST DISPUTES
- III. PRESSURES FOR PARALLEL JUDICIAL AND ARBITRAL PROCEEDINGS
- A. PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS GENERATED BY DIFFERENT ISSUES
- B. PARALLEL PROCEEDINGS GENERATED BY DIFFERENT PARTIES
- C. ARBITRATION BY ESTOPPEL
- D. BROAD CONSTRUCTION OF THE FAA HAS TENDED TO LIMIT THE NEED FOR PARALLEL COURT PROCEEDINGS
- IV. CONCLUSIONS
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 41 Arbitrating US Antitrust Law in Pharmaceuticals Markets
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. PHARMACEUTICAL ANTITRUST ISSUES LIKELY TO ARISE IN ARBITRATION
- A. CLAIMS BY COMPETITORS
- B. CLAIMS BY CUSTOMERS
- C. CLAIMS BY LICENSEES
- III. PRACTICAL ISSUES LIKELY TO ARISE IN ARBITRATION OF PHARMACEUTICAL ANTITRUST CLAIMS
- A. PUBLIC POLICY
- B. ISSUE PRECLUSION
- C. LIMITATIONS
- D. REMEDIES
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 42 Alternative Dispute Resolution and Federal Trade Commission Antitrust Enforcement
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. ADR IN PRIVATE ANTITRUST MATTERS
- A. OVERVIEW
- B. RATIONALE FOR THE AMERICAN SAFETY RULE
- C. THE GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENTS
- D. THE MITSUBISHI OPINION
- E. APPLICATION OF MITSUBISHI IN DOMESTIC CONTEXTS
- III. CONSTRAINTS ON THE FTC'S USE OF ADR PROCEEDINGS IN SUBSTANTIVE ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT MATTERS
- A. THE ADRA
- B. UNLAWFUL SUBDELEGATION OF FTC DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY
- C. AUGMENTATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
- D. CONFIDENTIALITY
- IV. FTC USE OF ADR IN ANTITRUST MATTERS
- A. FTC USE OF DIRECT ADR IN ANTITRUST
- B. COURT-RECOMMENDED MEDIATION
- C. USE OF ADR IN FTC ANTITRUST REMEDIES
- D. FTC PARTICIPATION IN ADR IN NON-FTC MATTERS
- V. FTC USE OF ADR IN NON-COMPETITION MATTERS
- A. CONSUMER PROTECTION
- B. RULEMAKING
- C. INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS
- VI. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 43 Arbitration and Criminal Liability for US Antitrust Law Violations
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. BACKGROUND
- A. CRIMINAL SANCTIONS UNDER US ANTITRUST LAW
- B. RELEVANCE OF US CRIMINAL ANTITRUST LAW TO ARBITRATION
- III. POTENTIAL IMPACT OF US CRIMINAL ANTITRUST PROCEEDINGS ON CIVIL ARBITRATION
- IV. POTENTIAL IMPACT OF CIVIL ARBITRATION ON US CRIMINAL ANTITRUST PROCEEDINGS
- A. CONFIDENTIALITY OF DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION PRODUCED IN ARBITRATION
- B. WHETHER ARBITRATORS ARE OBLIGATED OR PERMITTED TO REPORT EVIDENCE OF AN ANTITRUST OFFENCE
- V. ENFORCEMENT IN ARBITRATION OF AN AGREEMENT THAT VIOLATED US CRIMINAL ANTITRUST LAW
- A. ILLEGALITY AS A DEFENSE TO ENFORCEMENT
- B. PROSECUTING ARBITRATORS FOR A VIOLATION OF CRIMINAL ANTITRUST LAW
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 44 Possible Rules to Enhance the Effectiveness of Arbitration of US Antitrust Claims
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. DIFFERENT TYPES OF POTENTIAL ADJUSTMENTS
- A. OPTION I: OUTRIGHT REVERSAL OF MITSUBISHI
- B. OPTION II: LIMITING THE CATEGORIES OF ANTITRUST CLAIMS THAT CAN BE ARBITRATED
- C. OPTION III: PROCEDURAL REFORM - REQUIRING MINIMAL CONDITIONS FOR ARBITRATIONS OF US ANTITRUST CLAIMS
- 1. Discovery Rules
- 2. Consolidation of Proceedings
- 3. Qualifications for Arbitrators
- D. OPTION IV: CLARIFYING THE CHOICE-OF-LAW AND REMEDY ISSUES IN ARBITRATION OF US ANTITRUST CLAIMS
- E. OPTION V: ENHANCING THE POWER OF THE COURT AT THE AWARD STAGE
- III. CONCLUSIONS
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Part IV Arbitration in Merger Control
- Chapter 45 Essentials of EU Merger Control for Arbitration Practitioners
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. SOME PRELIMINARIES
- A. KEY FEATURES OF EU REGIME
- B. REMEDIES IN GENERAL
- C. EU MERGER REMEDIES: A BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
- 1. The Merger Regulation 1989
- 2. The 1998 Amendments
- 3. The Merger Regulation 2004
- III. LEGAL BASE AND STANDARD FOR COMMITMENTS UNDER THE EC MERGER REGULATION
- A. LEGAL BASE
- B. THE STANDARD FOR COMMITMENTS
- 1. The Elimination of Concerns and Proportionality Principles
- 2. Phase I and Phase II Remedies
- 3. The New Remedies Notice
- C. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF COMMITMENTS
- 1. Comprehensiveness
- 2. Certainty
- 3. No Need to Monitor
- IV. TYPES OF REMEDIES
- A. THE STRUCTURAL VERSUS BEHAVIOURAL DEBATE
- 1. The Argument for Structural Remedies
- 2. The Argument for Non-structural Remedies
- 3. The Remedies Notice 2008
- 4. Structural Remedies
- a. Disposal of a Whole Business
- b. Disposal of Part of a Business/Assets
- B. QUASI-STRUCTURAL AND BEHAVIOURAL REMEDIES
- 1. General
- 2. Applicable Standard of Review of Quasi-Structural and Behavioural Remedies
- a. The Commission's Divergence in Approach to Structural and Quasi-Structural/Behavioural Remedies
- b. Dependence on Merging Entity
- 3. Access-Type Remedies
- 4. Conclusion
- V. COORDINATED EFFECTS
- A. 'COORDINATION' EFFECTS
- B. VERTICAL AND CONGLOMERATE EFFECTS
- VI. TIME LIMITS AND OTHER PRACTICALITIES
- A. THE PARTIES' AND THE COMMISSION'S RESPONSIBILITIES IN EC REMEDY NEGOTIATIONS
- B. 'STATE OF PLAY' MEETINGS
- C. THE IMPLEMENTING REGULATION
- 1. Deadlines for Submission of Remedies in Phases I and II
- 2. Non-compliance with the Deadlines
- 3. Expressions of Intention and Conditional Commitments
- VII. COMMISSION GUIDANCE
- VIII. A COMPARISON OF PHASE I AND PHASE II REMEDIES AND THE REMEDIES STUDY
- A. PHASE I AND PHASE II REMEDIES COMPARED
- 1. General
- 2. Applicability of Different Standards of Review
- 3. Impact of the Remedies Study and the New Remedies Notice
- B. THE REMEDIES STUDY
- 1. Background
- 2. Findings
- 3. Consequences Post Review
- IX. THE DIVESTITURE REMEDY
- A. GENERAL
- B. TYPES OF DIVESTITURE
- 1. Exits from a JV
- 2. Severance of other links
- 3. Termination of memberships
- 4. Sale of a viable competing business
- C. THE MECHANICS OF THE DIVESTITURE
- 1. Timing and Practicalities
- 2. 'Up-Front' Buyer and 'Fix-It-First'
- 3. The 'Crown Jewel' Remedy
- D. SCOPE OF DIVESTITURE
- 1. Potential Ineffectiveness of Divestiture
- 2. The Commission's Response
- X. IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIES
- A. IMPLEMENTATION OF STRUCTURAL REMEDIES
- 1. The 'Hold-Separate' Manager
- 2. The Monitoring Trustee
- 3. The Divestiture Trustee
- 4. Approval of Purchaser
- 5. Approval of the Terms of Sale
- 6. During the Disposal Process
- 7. After the Disposal
- 8. Variation and Release
- a. General
- b. Reacquisition of the Divestment Business
- c. Model Commitments Standard Review Clause
- d. Release of Commitments
- e. Variation of Commitments
- f. Automatic Termination of Commitments
- B. IMPLEMENTATION OF NON-STRUCTURAL REMEDIES
- 1. Monitoring of Compliance
- 2. The Use of Dispute Resolution as Monitoring Mechanisms
- C. ENFORCEMENT
- 1. Conditions and Obligations
- 2. Consequences of Breach
- 3. Revocation of Phase I and Phase II Clearance Decisions
- XI. JUDICIAL REVIEW
- XII. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- LIST OF EU COMMISSION DECISIONS
- Chapter 46 International Arbitration and ADR in Conditional EU Merger Clearance Decisions
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. STRUCTURAL VERSUS BEHAVIOURAL COMMITMENTS IN EU MERGER CONTROL
- A. GENERAL
- 1. Definition
- 2. The Commission's and the Luxembourg Courts' Approach
- B. THE REVISED COMMISSION NOTICE ON REMEDIES
- 1. General
- 2. The Role of Arbitration
- III. THE USE OF ARBITRATION IN CONDITIONAL EU MERGER CLEARANCE DECISIONS
- A. GENERAL
- 1. Classification of Remedies and Types of Cases
- 2. Functionality of Arbitration in EU Merger Control
- a. Approval of Arbitration Commitments by the Union Institutions
- b. Rejection of Arbitration Commitments by Union Institutions
- 3. Triggering of Arbitration Commitments to Date
- 4. Enforceability of the Resulting Award
- 5. The Implications of the Commission's Recent Experience of Monitoring Commitments in Microsof
- B. THE COMMISSION'S MOTIVATION
- 1. Arbitration over Litigation
- 2. Arbitration over Public Administrative Proceedings
- 3. Empowerment of Third-Party Beneficiaries
- 4. Advantages for the Parties Involved
- a. For the Notifying Parties
- b. For Third-Party Beneficiaries
- C. THE WORKINGS OF AN ARBITRATION COMMITMENT
- 1. Definition
- 2. How to Trigger an Arbitration Commitment
- a. The Arbitration Self-Enforcement Mechanism
- b. The Third-Party Notification Requirement
- 3. How to Enforce an Arbitration Commitment
- a. From the Point of View of the Third-Party Beneficiary
- i. In Reliance on the Commission's Decision or the Commitments Letter
- ii. In Reliance on the Implementation Agreement
- b. From the Point of View of the Merged Entity
- D. THE ARBITRATOR'S JURISDICTION AND MANDATE
- 1. The Nature and Scope of the Arbitrator's Jurisdiction
- 2. The Dual Character of the Arbitrator's Mandate
- 3. The Arbitrator's Findings
- a. Where Implementation Agreement in Place
- b. Where No Implementation Agreement in Place
- E. THE COMMISSION'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS
- 1. General
- 2. The Commission as Amicus Arbitri
- 3. The Commission's Supervisory Role
- F. ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL ARBITRATION PROVISIONS USED IN CONDITIONAL EU MERGER CLEARANCE DECISIONS TO DATE
- 1. General
- 2. The Commission's Practice of Arbitration in Conditional EU Merger Clearance Decisions
- a. The Expected Parties to the Arbitration
- b. Notification Requirements to Third Parties
- c. Preliminary Negotiations
- d. Initiation of the Arbitration
- e. Arbitration Option versus Arbitration Obligation
- f. The Modus Arbitrandi: Institutional or Ad Hoc?
- g. The Situs Arbitri
- h. The Lingua Arbitri
- i. Appointment of Arbitrators and Constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal
- j. The Deadline for Rendering the Award and the 'Fast-Track Procedure'
- k. Scope of the arbitration
- l. The Arbitrator's Powers and Duties
- i. Duty of Confidentiality
- ii. Terms of Reference
- iii. Power to Determine Procedural Rules
- iv. Right to Request Information
- v. Request of Interpretation from the Commission
- vi. Powers to Investigate
- vii. Power to Appoint Experts and Request Further Assistance
- viii. Power to Injunct and/or Order Specific Performance
- ix. Power to Issue Interim Measures of Protection
- x. Burden of Proof and the 'Prima Facie Evidence Rule'
- xi. Duty to Call a Hearing
- xii. The Deadline for Rendering the Award
- xiii. Right to Fix Fees
- xiv. 'Pendulum Arbitration'
- xv. Other
- m. Applicable Procedural Law
- n. Applicable Substantive Law
- o. Allocation of Costs
- p. Duration of the Arbitration Commitment
- q. Execution of the Award
- r. Potential Review of the Award
- s. Publication Requirement
- t. The Commission's Involvement in the Arbitral Proceedings
- u. The Role of the Monitoring Trustee
- v. Commitment to Design a Suitable Arbitration Commitment
- G. TABLE ON THE COMMISSION'S EXPERIENCE OF ARBITRATION IN CONDITIONAL EU MERGER CLEARANCE DECISIONS
- IV. THE USE OF ADR IN CONDITIONAL EU MERGER CLEARANCE DECISIONS
- A. GENERAL
- B. THE USE OF MED-ARB COMMITMENTS
- 1. General
- 2. Commission Practice to Date
- C. THE USE OF PURE MEDIATION COMMITMENTS
- 1. General
- 2. Commission Practice to Date
- a. The Commission's Experience of Pure Mediation in E.ON/Mol
- b. The Commission's Experience of Pure Mediation in DONG/Elsam/Energi E2
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE ON EU COMMISSION DECISIONS
- TABLE OF ARBITRATION AWARDS
- Chapter 47 Arbitration in Merger Control Remedies: Lessons from the Canadian Experience
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. BEHAVIOURAL REMEDIES IN MERGER CONTROL
- A. THE USE OF BEHAVIOURAL REMEDIES IN MERGER CONTROL GENERALLY
- B. THE USE OF BEHAVIOURAL REMEDIES OUTSIDE THE CONTEXT OF MERGER CONTROL
- III. ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES ARISING FROM BEHAVIOURAL COMMITMENTS
- A. TYPES OF BEHAVIOURAL REMEDIES
- B. ARBITRATION AS AN IDEAL ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM
- C. USE OF ARBITRATION MECHANISMS
- 1. Competence of Arbitral Tribunals in the Adjudication of Public Commitments
- 2. The EU and US Experiences
- 3. The Canadian Experience
- a. Competition Bureau Approach to Merger Remedies
- b. Use of Arbitration Regimes in Merger Remedies
- c. Triggering of Arbitration Mechanisms to Date
- IV. DESIGNING AN ARBITRATION MECHANISM
- A. GENERAL APPROACH
- B. KEY COMPONENTS OF AN ARBITRATION MECHANISM
- 1. Administered Versus Ad Hoc
- 2. Choice of Rules
- 3. Number of Arbitrators
- 4. Choice of Arbitrators
- 5. The Arbitral Seat
- 6. Agency Participation/Oversight
- 7. Cost Rules
- C. EVOLUTION OF CANADIAN PRACTICE
- V. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Chapter 48 Arbitration in US Antitrust Enforcement
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. USE OF ARBITRATION IN DOJ AND FTC ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
- A. GENERAL
- B. SUMMARY OF DOJ AND FTC ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
- 1. Use of Arbitration in DOJ Enforcement Actions
- a. DOJ Enforcement Actions under Section 1 of the Sherman Act
- b. DOJ Enforcement Actions under Section 7 of the Clayton Act
- 2. Use of Arbitration in FTC Enforcement Actions
- III. EVALUATION OF THE USE OF ARBITRATION IN DOJ AND FTC ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
- A. GENERAL APPROACH
- B. KEY COMPONENTS OF ARBITRATION MECHANISMS TO DATE
- 1. Number of Arbitrators
- 2. Applicable Arbitration Rules
- 3. Prior Use of Other ADR Procedures
- 4. Applicable Law and Venue
- 5. Scope of Discovery
- 6. Reasoned Decision
- 7. Time Constraints
- 8. Limitations on Arbitrators' Authority
- 9. Agency Oversight of Arbitration
- 10. Agency Participation
- 11. Binding Nature
- 12. Non-compliance with Arbitration Decision
- IV. CONCLUSION
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- Part V Institutional Antitrust Arbitration
- Chapter 49 Antitrust Arbitration under the ICC Rules
- I. INTRODUCTION
- II. SOME PRELIMINARIES
- A. GENERAL
- B. THE ICC'S PROMOTION OF ANTITRUST ARBITRATION
- 1. The ICC's Ad Hoc Working Groups on Antitrust Arbitration
- a. The ICC Joint Working Party on Arbitration and Competition
- b. The ICC Task Force for Arbitrating Competition Law Issues
- 2. The ICC Commission on Competition
- 3. The ICC's Role as Amicus Curiae
- 4. The ICC's Symposia, Events and Specialist Publications on Antitrust Arbitration
- C. SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF THE ICC RULES IN ANTITRUST
- 1. The Use of the ICC Rules in Ordinary Antitrust Arbitrations
- 2. The Use of the ICC Rules in EU Remedy-Related Arbitrations
- a. As a Procedural Framework for Arbitration Commitments in Article 101(3) TFEU Exemption Decisions
- b. As a Procedural Framework for Arbitration Commitments in Article 9 Commitment Decisions
- c. As a Procedural Framework for Arbitration Commitments under EU Merger Control
- III. THE ICC COURT'S PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF ANTITRUST ARBITRATION
- A. GENERAL
- B. TABLE ON THE ICC'S PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF ANTITRUST ARBITRATIONS TO DATE
- C. ANALYSIS OF INDIVIDUAL ICC ANTITRUST AWARDS TO DATE
- 1. Ontology of ICC Antitrust Arbitral Proceedings
- a. The Factual Framework
- b. The Contractual Framework
- i. The Arbitration Agreement
- ii. The Main Agreement
- c. The Arbitrating Parties
- d. The Arbitration Tribunal
- e. The Award
- 2. Nature of Antitrust Issues Arising in ICC Arbitrations
- a. Topography of Cases
- b. Scope of ICC Tribunals' Jurisdiction
- i. Application of Article 101(3) TFEU
- ii. Application of EU Block-Exemption Regulations
- iii. Award of Civil Law Remedies under EU, U.S. and Other National Antitrust Laws
- 3. Basis of ICC Tribunals' Antitrust Jurisdiction
- a. Antitrust Arbitrability as Found by ICC Tribunals
- b. The Doctrine of Separability in ICC Antitrust Arbitrations
- c. Grounds for Application of Antitrust Laws Invoked by ICC Tribunals
- i. Extraterritorial Application of Antitrust Laws
- ii. Consideration of the Lex Contractus
- iii. Consideration of Applicable Conflicts of Laws Rules
- iv. ICC Tribunals' Duty to Render an Enforceable Award
- v. Public Policy Considerations
- vi. Other
- vii. The Cumulative Approach
- d. Exercise of ex officio Duty to Raise Antitrust Laws by ICC Tribunals
- e. ICC Tribunals Acting as 'Amiables Compositeurs' or 'Ex Aequo et Bono'
- f. Importance of the Terms of Reference
- 4. Conduct of ICC Antitrust Proceedings by ICC Tribunals
- a. Fact-Finding by ICC Antitrust Tribunals
- b. Presentation of Expert Evidence before ICC Antitrust Tribunals
- c. Disclosure in ICC Antitrust Arbitrations
- d. Status of Previous Decisions Taken by Antitrust Authorities
- e. Status of Parallel Proceedings
- f. Preliminary References to the ECJ
- g. Procedural Involvement of Antitrust Authorities
- 5. Findings by ICC Antitrust Tribunals
- a. Outcome as Determined by ICC Antitrust Tribunals
- b. Remedies Awarded by ICC Antitrust Tribunals
- c. Allocation of Costs by ICC Antitrust Tribunals
- E. ENFORCEABILITY OF ICC ANTITRUST AWARDS TO DATE
- 1. Enforceability under the ICC Rules in General
- 2. Enforcement of ICC Antitrust Awards to Date
- F. ATTRIBUTION OF LIABILITY UNDER THE ICC RULES IN ANTITRUST ARBITRATIONS
- 1. General Exemption from Liability under the ICC Rules
- 2. Practical Application of the Exemption in ICC Antitrust Arbitrations
- IV. CONCLUSION
- BIBLIOGRAPHY
- TABLE OF LEGISLATION
- TABLE OF CASES
- TABLE OF ICC AWARDS
- TABLE OF OTHER AWARDS
- TABLE OF EU COMMISSION DECISIONS
- Annexes
- Annex I Table on Commission's Experience of Arbitration in Exemption Decisions Under Article 81(3) EC (Article 101(3) TFEU)
- Annex II Table on Conditional EU Merger Clearance Decisions Incorporating Arbitration Commitments Over the Period 1992-2009
- Annex III Table on ICC Arbitration Awards Involving Antitrust Issues Over the Period 1964-2010
- Cumulative Bibliography
- Cumulative Table of Legislation
- Cumulative Table of Cases
- Cumulative Table of Awards
- Table of EU Commission Decisions
- Cumulative Index
- Back Cover
System requirements
File format: PDF
Copy-Protection: Adobe-DRM (Digital Rights Management)
System requirements:
- Computer (Windows; MacOS X; Linux): Install the free reader Adobe Digital Editions prior to download (see eBook Help).
- Tablet/smartphone (Android; iOS): Install the free app Adobe Digital Editions or the app PocketBook before downloading (see eBook Help).
- E-reader: Bookeen, Kobo, Pocketbook, Sony, Tolino and many more (only limited: Kindle).
The file format PDF always displays a book page identically on any hardware. This makes PDF suitable for complex layouts such as those used in textbooks and reference books (images, tables, columns, footnotes). Unfortunately, on the small screens of e-readers or smartphones, PDFs are rather annoying, requiring too much scrolling.
This eBook uses Adobe-DRM, a „hard” copy protection. If the necessary requirements are not met, unfortunately you will not be able to open the eBook. You will therefore need to prepare your reading hardware before downloading.
Please note: We strongly recommend that you authorise using your personal Adobe ID after installation of any reading software.
For more information, see our eBook Help page.