GR Semicolon EN

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author
Sheridan, Alexandra
en
dc.date.accessioned
2016-05-06T07:33:50Z
dc.date.available
2016-05-07T00:00:04Z
dc.date.issued
2016-05-06
dc.identifier.uri
https://repository.ihu.edu.gr//xmlui/handle/11544/14497
dc.rights
Default License
dc.subject
mergers
en
dc.subject
competition law
en
dc.subject
European Commission
en
dc.title
Is the relevant EU legislation regarding competition law on mergers effective in preventing mergers that result in a dominant market position? Or is the Commission exceeding its competence in its application of legislation causing it to be ineffective in light of relevant case law?
en
heal.type
masterThesis
el
heal.creatorID.email
alexandra.sheridan@outlook.com
heal.generalDescription
This dissertation is primarily concerned with the question is the competition legislation in relation to merger control effective in preventing mergers that result in a dominant market position or whether the Commission is exceeding its competence in its application of it causing the legislation to become ineffective
en
heal.classification
Law
en
heal.keywordURI.LCSH
Antitrust law
heal.keywordURI.LCSH
Law and economics
heal.keywordURI.LCSH
Competition, Unfair
heal.keywordURI.LCSH
Consolidation and merger of corporations
heal.keywordURI.LCSH
Consolidation and merger of corporations--Law and legislation
heal.keywordURI.LCSH
Consolidation and merger of corporations--Case studies
heal.language
en
el
heal.access
free
el
heal.license
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
el
heal.references
Articles Andreangeli A (2005) Fairness and timing in Merger Control proceedings : will the “stop - the - clock” clause work ? European Competition Law Review 26(7), 403 - 409 Bay M & Calzado J (2005) Tetra Laval II : the coming of age of the judicial review of merger decisions . W. Comp, 28(4), 433 - 453 Bailey D (2003). Standard of proof in EC Merger Proceedings : A common la w perspective. Common Market Law Review. 40: 845 - 888 Burnside A, “ Preuve Solide: The CFI Raises The Bar ” in Competition December 2002, available on www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk Garret G (1995). The Politics o f legal integration in the European Union . International Organization 46 Gibson J; Calderia G (1995). The Legitimacy of Transnational Legal Institutions : Compliance, Support, and the European Court of Justice . American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 3 9 Issue 2 Harker M (2007). Cross - border mergers in the EU : The Commission v The Member States . European Competition Journal. Vol 3 No 2. Haupt H (2002). Case Comment : Collective dominance under Article 82 E.C and E.C. merger control in the light of the A irtors judgement . European Competition Law Review 23(9), 434 - 444 Koppenfels U (2015) A Fresh Look at the EU Merger Regulation? The European Commission’s White Paper ‘‘Towards More Effective EU Merger Control’’ . Liverpool Law Review (2015) 36:7 - 31 Kovacic W et al (2014). Merger control procedures and institutions : A comparison of EU and US practice . The antitrust bulletin vol 59, No 1/spring 2014 Student No 1104140044 31 Jaeger M (2011). The standard of review in competition cases involving complex economic assessments : towards t he marginalisation of the marginal review?. Journal of European Competition Law and Practice. 2(4) 295 - 314 Matti, W & Slaughter A (1998). Revisiting the European Court of Justice . International Organization, Vol. 52, No 1 Montag F (1996), ‘ The Case for a Radical Reform of the Infringement Procedure under Regulation 17 ’ (1996) 8 European Competition Law Review 428, at 430 - 432 Overd A (2002). Editorial : After the Airtours appeal . European Competition Law Review. 23(8), 375 – 377 Petit N , The Future of the Court of Justice in EU Competition Law, New Role and Responsibilities, in THE COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE: ANALYSES AND PERSPECTIVES ON SIXTY YEARS OF CASE - LAW 397 (Ct. of Justice European Union ed., 2013). Petre & Nucara (2005). Stand ard of proof and scope of judicial review in EC merger cases : everything clear after Tetra Laval (2005) E.C.L.R, 26(12) 692 - 704 Renshaw A & Blockx J (2013) Judicial review of mergers in the EU . The Antitrust Bulletin : Vol 58, Nos 2 & 3 Summer - Fall 2013 Slater et al (1994) Competition law proceeding before the European Commission and the right to a fair trial : no need for reform? . Global competition Law Centre Working Paper Series GCLC Working Paper 04/08 Slynn G (1989) Court of First Instance of the E uropean Communities . Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business. Volume 9. Winter 1989. Stroux S (2002). Case Comment : Collective dominance under the Merger Regulation : a serious evidentiary reprimand for the Commission . European Law Review, 27(6), 736 – 746. Szczordrowski J (2012). Standard of judicial review of merger decisions concerning oligopolistic markets . Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies. Vol 2012, 5(6) Student No 1104140044 32 Temple Lang J, “ Two important Merger Regulation judgments: the implic ations of Schneider - Legrand and Tetra Laval - Sidel ” [2003] E.L. Rev. 268 Todorov F & Valcke A (2006). Judicial review of merger control decisions in the European Union . The antitrust bulletin:Vol. 51, No 2/summer 2006 Books Bellis JF, Porter E , Bael V (E ds) (2011). Merger Control : Jurisdictional Comparisons . London : Sweet and Maxwell Whish R & Bailey D (2012). Competition Law . New York : Oxford University Press ECJ and CFI Cases Case T – 342/99, Airtours v Commission , 2002 E.C.R. II - 2585 Joined Cases T - 25/95 a.o. Cimenteries CBR a.o. [2000] ECR II - 700 Case T - 114/02, BaByliss v. Comm’n, 2003 E.C.R. II - 1279 Case T - 125/97 Coca Cola v Commission Case C - 440/07 Commission of the European Communities v Schneider Electric SA [2009] E.C.R. I - 6413 Case C - 12/03 C ommission of the European Communities v Tetra Laval BV [2005] E.C.R. I - 987 Case 27/76 Continental Can v Commission, United Brands v Commission. Case T - 87/05 EDP v Commission [2005] ECR II - 3745, [2005] 5 CMLR 1436 C - 56/64 Etablissements Consten Sarl v Com mission of the European Economic Community, Case C - 58/64 Grundig - Verkaufs GmbH v Commission of the European Economic Community [1966] E.C.R. 299 Cases C - 68/94 France v Commission [1998] ECR I - 1375, [1998] 4 CMLR 829 Student No 1104140044 33 Case T - 102/96 Gencor v Commission [19 99] ECR II - 753, [1999] 4 CMLR 971 Case T - 210/01 General Electric v Commission [2005] ECR II - 5575, [2006] 4 CMLR 686 Case T - 464/04 Impala v Commission [2006] ECR II - 2289, [2006] 5 CMLR 1049 Case T - 310/00 MCI Inc. v. Commission [2004] ECR II - 3253, [20 04] 5 CMLR 1274 Case 42/84, Remia B.V., Verenigde Bedrijven Nutricia N.V. and Another v E.C. Commission [1985] E.C.R. 2545 Case T - 119/02, Royal Philips v. Comm’n, 2003 E.C.R. II - 1433 Case T - 310/01, Schneider Electric SA V. Commission, 2002 E.C.R. 11 - 4071 (a nnulment of prohibition decision) Case T - 77/02, Schneider Electric v. Commission, 2002 E.C.R. 11 - 4201 (annulment of divestiture decision) Case T - 282/06 Sun chemical group BV & others v Commission Case T – 5/02 Tetra Laval BV v Commission, 2002. E.C.R. II - 4 382 – Annulment of prohibition Case T80 – 02, Tetra Laval v. Commission, 2002 E.C.R. II - 45I9 – Annulment of divestiture decision Commission case s case COMP/M.6611 - Aria Foods/Milk Link case COMP/M.6447 - IAG/bmi Case COMP/ M 1741 MCI WorldCom/Sprin t case CO MP/M.6459 - Son y/Mubadala/EMI music publishing case COMP/M.6258 - Teva/Cephalon Primary Legislation Article 101 Treaty on the functioning of the European Union Student No 1104140044 34 Article 102 Treaty on the functioning of the European Union Article 106 Treaty on the functioni ng of the European Union Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) Commission Regulation (EC) No 802/2004 Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ L 395, 30 December 1989, p. 1). Regulation 1/2003 that grants the Commission power to be able to enforce Article 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. Secondary Legislation Amendm ents to the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities, 2000 O.J. (L 322) 4. Commission Consolidated Jurisdictional Notice Commission Notice on a simplified procedure Commission Notice on case referral Commission Notice on the definition of the relevant market Guidelines on the assessment of horizontal mergers Guidelines on the assessment of non - horizontal mergers Commission Notice on remedies Commission Notice on restrictions Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings Commission Notice on the rules for access to the Commission file Websites Student No 1104140044 35 Author Unknow http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/statistics [accessed 03/01/2015] Author Unknow http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/resources/edc/Court%20of%20Justice. pdf [accessed 27/01/2016] Case No IV/M.1524 – Airtours/First Choice Judgement http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/decisions/m1524_en.pdf [Accessed 12/09/2015] J udgement of Court of First Instance (first chamber) 22/10/02 in Case T - 310/01 http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.j sf?text=&docid=47796&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN& mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1153335 [Accessed 04/12/2015] Judgement of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber) 25/10/02 Case T - 80/02 http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=47830&pageIndex=0&docl ang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1161613 [accessed 17/11/15] Judgement of the Court of First instance (second Chamber) 28/09/04 in Case T - 310/00 http://curia.europa.eu/juris/showPdf.jsf?text=&do cid=84830&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&m ode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1165453 [accessed 12/01/2016]
el
heal.recordProvider
School of Economics, Business Administration and Legal Studies, LLM in Transnational and European Commercial Law, Mediation, Arbitration and Energy Law
el
heal.publicationDate
2016-02-03
heal.abstract
This dissertation was written as part of the LLM in Transnational and European Commercial Law at the International Hellenic University. This dissertation is primarily concerned with the question is the competition legislation in relation to merger control effective in preventing mergers that result in a dominant market position or whether the Commission is exceeding its competence in its application of it causing it to become ineffective in the light of relevant case law. Looking at the current legislation, the role of the Commission, the judicial review procedure available, statistics and the relevant literature, it will conclude that the legislation is sufficient as the Commission has successfully prohibited mergers in a dominant position, and that it rarely exceeds in competence in this area, and that in those instances the judicial review procedure available is sufficient to remedy this. Although changes may be warranted in this area they are yet to come to fruition. Therefore, merger control in the context of the European Union and the commissions role within this area can be said to be appropriate. I would like to acknowledge my supervisor Dr Pavlos Masouros for his advice, guidance and support. To my family and friends who have given me encouragement and the belief to complete this dissertation. Without you all I couldn’t have done it. Thank you.
en
heal.tableOfContents
introduction, current merger legislation in the EU, role of the Commission and procedure undertaken, statistics, judicial review, relevant cases, literature review, conclusion, bibliography
en
heal.advisorName
Pavlos, Masouros Dr
en
heal.committeeMemberName
Trouli, Emmanuela Dr
en
heal.committeeMemberName
Metaxas, A Dr
en
heal.academicPublisher
IHU
en
heal.academicPublisherID
ihu
el
heal.numberOfPages
35
el
heal.spatialCoverage
Europe
en
heal.temporalCoverage
20th Century
en
heal.temporalCoverage
21st Century
en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Related Items