Remedies in EU antitrust law

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.

Publication Details

Journal
London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Published
2025-06-30
Primary Topic
Diverse Legal and Medical Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Remedies in EU antitrust law

London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Diverse Legal and Medical Studies
article

Remedies in EU antitrust law

article en

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.

London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
Diverse Legal and Medical Studies
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.