The Increasing (Ab)use of Commitments in European Antitrust Law: Stockholm Syndrome
Stefano Grassani, Mar 28, 2013
If an “EU antitrust hot topic of the month” award were to be attributed for March 2013, the prize would certainly go to the issue of commitments pursuant to article 9 of Regulation 1/2003, which made the front page of most antitrust newswires and blogs thanks to two notable cases.
On the one hand, on March 6, 2013, the Commission adopted a decision imposing a fine of U.S.$794 million on Microsoft for failure to comply with undertakings offered, in 2009 to the European Commission, in exchange for the closing of the abuse-of-dominance investigation related to the alleged tying of Internet Explorer and the Windows operating system. On the other hand, on March 13, 2013, the Commission published in the Official Journal of the European Union the text of its December 2012 decision where it had accepted commitments from Apple and four publishers in connection with a supposed concerted practice as to retail prices of e-Books.
Ten years after the enactment of Regulation 1/2003, these decisions give us the occasion for a few reflections on the subject of the institutional and philosophical implications that stem from the insertion in the EU framework of commitments as means to preempt further public enforcement action on the merits.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
Federal Judge Orders Google to Open Android App Store Amid Antitrust Pressure
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Federal Judge Greenlights FTC’s Antitrust Lawsuit Against Amazon, Tosses Some State Claims
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Rejects Uber and Lyft’s Appeal in California Gig Worker Suits
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Supreme Court Sidesteps 5-Hour Energy Pricing Case, Allowing Antitrust Claims to Proceed
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Tempur Sealy and Mattress Firm Argue FTC Proceedings Are Unconstitutional in New Suit
Oct 7, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh