REMEDIES IN EU ANTITRUST LAW

Abstract Remedies are central in contemporary EU antitrust enforcement. However, they remain relatively misunderstood. Against this background, this article has three main objectives. It seeks, first, to shed light on the nature and purpose of remedial action under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, with a focus on the European Commission’s activity. The point of intervention, the case law shows, is to bring an infringement effectively to an end. As a matter of positive law, it is unclear that there is room for restorative remedies (that is, remedies that seek to recreate the conditions of competition as they would have existed in the absence of the practice). Second, the article takes a critical perspective on the practice of the past decade. It appears, in particular, that a ‘principles-based approach’ to the administration of remedies is likely to lead to suboptimal outcomes. Finally, some recommendations are outlined so that the letter of the law matches the demands and ambitions of the sort of regulatory-like intervention that is necessary in digital markets and other industries presenting similar features.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Competition Law & Economics
Published
2024-12-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/joclec/nhae022
Citations
1
Primary Topic
European and International Law Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.23
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

REMEDIES IN EU ANTITRUST LAW

Pablo Ibáñez Colomo
1 citations
Journal of Competition Law & Economics
European and International Law Studies
2.23
article

REMEDIES IN EU ANTITRUST LAW

Pablo Ibáñez Colomo
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Remedies are central in contemporary EU antitrust enforcement. However, they remain relatively misunderstood. Against this background, this article has three main objectives. It seeks, first, to shed light on the nature and purpose of remedial action under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, with a focus on the European Commission’s activity. The point of intervention, the case law shows, is to bring an infringement effectively to an end. As a matter of positive law, it is unclear that there is room for restorative remedies (that is, remedies that seek to recreate the conditions of competition as they would have existed in the absence of the practice). Second, the article takes a critical perspective on the practice of the past decade. It appears, in particular, that a ‘principles-based approach’ to the administration of remedies is likely to lead to suboptimal outcomes. Finally, some recommendations are outlined so that the letter of the law matches the demands and ambitions of the sort of regulatory-like intervention that is necessary in digital markets and other industries presenting similar features.

Journal of Competition Law & EconomicsVol. 21(2)
College of Europe (BE), London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
European and International Law Studies
2.23
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.