00:01 Introduction – co-existence of EU and national ex-post and ex-ante legal systems
01:10 The conundrum was complex already with Regulation 1/2003; now with the DMA we've got another important layer of this labyrinth Or Brook (OB)
02:00 Historical elements of the conundrum – OB
02:30 At the beginning the issue has not been thematised too often – not least because most of EUMSs didn't have national competition law regime – OB
03:00 Decentralised enforcement & shifting from notification system have fuelled the discussion – OB
04:30 Why we've got a provision in Regulation 1/2003 permitting application of stricter rules on unilateral conduct as the rules aiming at predominantly other objectives – OB
05:40 What is "stricter"? – OB
06:30 What is predominantly different objective? – OB
08:40 Adding the DMA to the conundrum Magali Eban (ME)
10:00 German influence on shaping the relevant provisions of the DMA – ME
11:00 Undistorted competition ex-post competition law vs. fairness & contestability DMA – ME
12:50 Germany is already enforcing broad national equivalent of the DMA – ME
14:10 And we will have more and more regimes and examples of such parallel enforcement – ME
15:10 What do we mean by decentralised enforcement of Regulation 1/2003 – Giorgio Monti (GM)
15:50 The logic of the centralised enforcement – GM
17:20 Why the conflict of laws must be managed – GM
18:00 There is a duty of cooperation, and this may help – GM
19:40 Historically the drafting of Reg 17/1962 was more of a patchwork – OB
20:50 Different options discussed for Regulation 17/1962 – OB
22:10 The idea of having tougher rules giving grater priority to Arts 101 & 102 TFEU – OB
22:40 Some of the provisions were more Germany-focused, others – more France-focused. In a sense we see similar processes with the DMA – OB
23:20 The DMA and the conflicts of laws – ME
24:10 The importance of recitals – both of Regulations 17/62 & 1/03 as well as the DMA – ME
24:30 Arts 1(5) & (6) DMA the ingredients of the puzzle – ME
29:20 The role of effect analysis in the DMA – ME
31:10 Examples of the conflict – GM
32:30 Can you regulate a large player from perspectives other than fairness & contestability? – and if yes is it a problem or an opportunity? – GM
33:05 Experimentalism in competition law – GM
33:40 Authorities should not undercut each other – GM
35:00 DMA is effect-based – GM
36:50 Member States can go very far – OB
39:20 Can gatekeepers question validity of any national law because it concerns fairness/contestability – and thus being ultra vires? – ME
41:00 Yes, fairness is everywhere, but don't reduce it ad absurdum – ME
42:40 But what about contestability? – ME
43:50 What is fairness, what is contestability – hard to have consensus even between specialists within same silo – ME
44:40 Most of these challenges are resolvable in practice – GM
46:00 How much would the courts engage in these discussions – GM
48:00 Empirical study of different national competition authorities's approach to stricter conduct – OB
49:30 Identifying the benchmarks – OB
51:30 How Germany and France applied Art 3 Reg 1/2003 – OB
54:00 How do the MSs find a compromise in these highly problematic issues & cui prodest – ME
58:50 Private enforcement and the DMA: pros & cons and how to square it with the previous narrative of centralisation of the DMA – GM
01:01:01 Each major legislative initiative usually rely on private enforcement – this is what the history of EU competition law and EU law more generally teaches us – GM
01:01:45 Most of EU laws are enforced in decentralised manner – GM
01:02:20 Are we reaching the end of this period (of the paradigmatic role of private enforcement)? – GM
01:03:40 MSs have no incentive to help the Commission to enforce the DMA – GM
01:05:20 Role of private enforcement in identifying captures – OB
01:06:20 The logic of private enforcement was more robust in the past – ME
01:07:20 Who is harmed by the conduct prohibited by the DMA? – ME
01:07:45 If the interest is more collective – maybe private enforcement is not so obviously beneficial to achieving this – ME
01:10:00 There is always collective interest in each private action – GM
01:11:00 Litigation and raising rival's costs – GM
01:12:30 Recommendation to students – OB, ME, GM

Discussing the relationship between the Commission and NCAs/NRAs in applying the DMA and national competition/sectoral rules. The potential for discrepancy is very big, and it has its clear roots in the past with enforcing Reg. 1/2003. Three remarkable specialists in the field offer their views on the future development in the field.

Prof. Giorgio Monti, Tilburg University Law School, Joint Editor of the Common Market Law Review, Research Fellow at CERRE

Dr Or Brook, Associate Professor in Competition Law and Policy, University of Leeds, School of Law

Dr Magali Eben, Lecturer in Competition Law, University of Glasgow, School of Law

свернуть