What does “by object”, in effect, mean? In search for the ultimate determination criterion

This article is dedicated to an EU competition law evergreen – by object restrictions. The CJEU established in its early case law that Article 101(1) TFEU (or its predecessors) could be infringed by restricting competition (i) by object or (ii) by effect. Once the former is present, the latter does not have to be. In other words, if an agreement restricts competition by object, it is superfluous to analyse and prove the actual restrictive effects on competition. The concept seems simple, yet it is far from it. As many other concepts, the concept of by object restrictions has developed with time. We believe that the last dozen of years has shown a particularly interesting development; recent judgements, delivered in 2023 and 2024, being no exception. It seems that the borderline between by object and by effect restriction is getting blurred and the whole concept of by object restriction more elusive, to the detriment of public as well as private enforcement of competition law. Thus, this article asks: which criteria are used in classification of a restriction as a by object one? Is there any ultimate criterion which is the most decisive in the classification process? In order to answer the questions, the article dives into case law on restrictions of competition by object. A qualitative analysis of selected (landmark) cases from Allianz Hungaria (2013) to recent judgements is conducted. The factual background of the analysed cases is presented briefly. The focus of the analysis is on the identification of criteria used by the CJEU when determining whether a restriction of competition is a by object one. The CJEU often repeats the same criteria, however, in certain cases it also adds new criteria which may (but not always are) repeated in the subsequent case law. Therefore, the qualitative analysis leads to the identification of a spectrum of criteria. Moreover, since the analysis is qualitative and not merely statistic, it also leads to the answer to the question what is, pursuant to the CJEU, the essential criterion in determination of whether a competition is restricted by object.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Published
2025-10-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.34632/mclawreview.2025.18015
Primary Topic
Digital Media and Visual Art
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

What does “by object”, in effect, mean? In search for the ultimate determination criterion

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Digital Media and Visual Art
article

What does “by object”, in effect, mean? In search for the ultimate determination criterion

article en

Abstract

This article is dedicated to an EU competition law evergreen – by object restrictions. The CJEU established in its early case law that Article 101(1) TFEU (or its predecessors) could be infringed by restricting competition (i) by object or (ii) by effect. Once the former is present, the latter does not have to be. In other words, if an agreement restricts competition by object, it is superfluous to analyse and prove the actual restrictive effects on competition. The concept seems simple, yet it is far from it. As many other concepts, the concept of by object restrictions has developed with time. We believe that the last dozen of years has shown a particularly interesting development; recent judgements, delivered in 2023 and 2024, being no exception. It seems that the borderline between by object and by effect restriction is getting blurred and the whole concept of by object restriction more elusive, to the detriment of public as well as private enforcement of competition law. Thus, this article asks: which criteria are used in classification of a restriction as a by object one? Is there any ultimate criterion which is the most decisive in the classification process? In order to answer the questions, the article dives into case law on restrictions of competition by object. A qualitative analysis of selected (landmark) cases from Allianz Hungaria (2013) to recent judgements is conducted. The factual background of the analysed cases is presented briefly. The focus of the analysis is on the identification of criteria used by the CJEU when determining whether a restriction of competition is a by object one. The CJEU often repeats the same criteria, however, in certain cases it also adds new criteria which may (but not always are) repeated in the subsequent case law. Therefore, the qualitative analysis leads to the identification of a spectrum of criteria. Moreover, since the analysis is qualitative and not merely statistic, it also leads to the answer to the question what is, pursuant to the CJEU, the essential criterion in determination of whether a competition is restricted by object.

SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología
Comenius University Bratislava (SK)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 29%
Digital Media and Visual Art
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.

What does “by object”, in effect, mean? In search for the ultimate determination criterion · SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS