How to Modernise the European Competition Network (ECN)

Authors: Dorota Galeza

Abstract:

This paper argues that networks, such as the ECN and the American network, are affected by certain small events which are inherent to path dependence and preclude the full evolution towards efficiency. It is advocated that the American network is superior to the ECN in many respects due to its greater flexibility and longer history. This stems in particular from the creation of the American network, which was based on a small number of cases. Such a structure encourages further changes and modifications which are not necessarily radical. The ECN, by contrast, was established by legislative action, which explains its rigid structure and resistance to change. This paper is an attempt to transpose the superiority of the American network on to the ECN. It looks at concepts such as judicial cooperation, harmonisation of procedure, peer review and regulatory impact assessments (RIAs), and dispute resolution procedures.

Keywords: Antitrust, Competition, Networks, Path Dependence.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1093514

References:

[1] A. Yalcintas, "Historical Small Events and the Eclipse of Utopia: Perspectives on Path Dependence in Human Thought”, 47(1) Culture, Theory & Critique vol. 47 no. 1, pp. 53-70, May 2006, p. 63.
[2] P.A. David, "Why are institutions the ‘carriers of history’?: path dependence and the evolution of conventions, organizations and institutions”, 5(2) Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, vol. 5 no. 2, pp. 205-220,1994, p. 2007.
[3] K. Zweigert and H. Kotz, Introduction to Comparative Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1998, pp. 4-5, 34. .
[4] M. M. Siems, "The End of Comparative Law”, Working Paper Series, WP 340, March 2007, pp. 1-28, 2007, p.6.
[5] M. J. Roe, "Chaos and Evolution in Law and Economics”, Harvard Law Review, vol. 109 pp. 641-668, 1996, p. 654.
[6] M. M. Siems, "The End of Comparative Law”, Working Paper Series, WP 340, March 2007, pp. 1-28, 2007, p.6.
[7] D.J. Gerber, "Convergence in the Treatment of Dominant Firm Conduct: The United States, the European Union, and the Institutional Embeddedness of Economics”, Antitrust Law Journal, vol. 76 no. 3, 951-986, 2010, p. 953.
[8] M. J. Roe, "Chaos and Evolution in Law and Economics”, Harvard Law Review, vol. 109 pp. 641-668, 1996, p. 660.
[9] F. Cengiz, Antitrust Federalism in the EU and the US, Abingdon: Routledge, 2012, p. 67.
[10] Regulation 1/2003.
[11] P.A. David, Path dependence in Economic Processes: Implications for Policy Analysis in Dynamical System Contexts, Torino: Fondazione Rosselli, , p. 1.
[12] C. Antonelli, "Path dependence, localised technological change and the quest for dynamic efficiency”, C. Antonelli, D. Foray, B.H. Hall and W.E. Steinmueller (eds), New Frontiers in the Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2006, pp. 54, 67.
[13] B. Strath, "Path dependence versus path-breaking crises: an alternative view”, in: L. Magnusson and J. Ottosson, (eds) The Evolution of Path Dependence, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2009, p. 27.
[14] M. Lagerholm and A. Malmberg, "Path dependence in economic geography”, in: L. Magnusson and J. Ottosson, (eds) The Evolution of Path Dependence, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2009, pp. 99-100.
[15] L.A. Bebchuk and M.J. Roe, "Theory of Path Dependence in Corporate Governance and Ownership”, Columbia Law School, The Center for Law and Economic Studies, November 1999, p. 1-38.
[16] W. Jefferson, "Judicial Cooperation in the US: Existing and Proposed Models”, http://ccj.ncsc.dni.us/speeches/Wallace%20Jefferson%20Speech.pdf (viewed 07/03/2013), p. 10.
[17] E. Storskrubb, "What Changes Will European Procedural Harmonization Bring?”, paper presented at the IAPL conference, 2009, p. 3.
[18] Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 of 29 (OJ L 160, 30 June 2000, 37).
[19] Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 (OJ L 174, 27 June 2001, 1).
[20] Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (OJ L 12, 16 January 2001, 1).
[21] E. Storskrubb, "What Changes Will European Procedural Harmonization Bring?”, paper presented at the IAPL conference, p. 3.
[22] K. Wright, "The European Commission’s Own ‘Preliminary Reference Procedure’ in Competition Cases?”, European Law Journal, vol. 16 no. 6, 736-759, 2009, 2010, pp. 746, 758.
[23] L. F. Del Duca, "Developing Global Transnational Harmonization Procedures for the Twenty-First Century: The Acceleration Pace of Common and Civil Law Convergence”, Texas International Law Journal, vol. 42, 625-660, 2007, p. 626.
[24] X. E. Kramer, "Harmonization of Civil Procedure and the Interaction with Private International Law”, SSRN paper, (available at) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2194293 (last accessed on 23/03/2013), 2012, pp. 127-128.
[25] Case C-237/07, Dieter Janecek v Freistaat Bayern, judgment of 25 July 2008, nyr.
[26] L. F. Del Duca, "Developing Global Transnational Harmonization Procedures for the Twenty-First Century: The Acceleration Pace of Common and Civil Law Convergence”, Texas International Law Journal, vol. 42, 625-660, 2007, p. 658.
[27] X. E. Kramer, "Harmonization of Civil Procedure and the Interaction with Private International Law”, SSRN paper, (available at) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2194293 (last accessed on 23/03/2013), 2012, p. 133.
[28] E. Storskrubb, "What Changes Will European Procedural Harmonization Bring?”, paper presented at the IAPL conference, 2009, pp. 1, 3, 5, 10, 11.
[29] X. E. Kramer, "Harmonization of Civil Procedure and the Interaction with Private International Law”, SSRN paper, (available at) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2194293 (last accessed on 23/03/2013), 2012, pp. 124-125; A. Uzelac, "Harmonised Civil Procedure in a World of Structural Divergences? Lessons Learned from the CEPEF Evaluations”, available online at http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/728/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-90-6704-817-0_9.pdf?auth66=1364761289_30d3331d96736f26305d18e8d4d96ace&ext=.pdf, (accessed on 16 March 2013), 2012, p. 201.
[30] L. F. Del Duca, "Developing Global Transnational Harmonization Procedures for the Twenty-First Century: The Acceleration Pace of Common and Civil Law Convergence”, Texas International Law Journal, vol. 42, 625-660, 2007, pp. 632, 658
[31] A. Uzelac, "Harmonised Civil Procedure in a World of Structural Divergences? Lessons Learned from the CEPEF Evaluations”, available online at http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/728/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-90-6704-817-0_9.pdf?auth66=1364761289_30d3331d96736f26305d18e8d4d96ace&ext=.pdf, (accessed on 16 March 2013), 2012, p. 178
[32] A. Uzelac, "Harmonised Civil Procedure in a World of Structural Divergences? Lessons Learned from the CEPEF Evaluations”, available online at http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/728/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-90-6704-817-0_9.pdf?auth66=1364761289_30d3331d96736f26305d18e8d4d96ace&ext=.pdf, (accessed on 16 March 2013), 2012, p. 176.
[33] A. Uzelac, "Harmonised Civil Procedure in a World of Structural Divergences? Lessons Learned from the CEPEF Evaluations”, available online at http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/728/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-90-6704-817-0_9.pdf?auth66=1364761289_30d3331d96736f26305d18e8d4d96ace&ext=.pdf, (accessed on 16 March 2013), 2012, p. 197.
[34] A. Uzelac, "Harmonised Civil Procedure in a World of Structural Divergences? Lessons Learned from the CEPEF Evaluations”, available online at http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/728/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-90-6704-817-0_9.pdf?auth66=1364761289_30d3331d96736f26305d18e8d4d96ace&ext=.pdf, (accessed on 16 March 2013), 2012, pp. 176,178, 187, 189-190, 192, 197, 203, 204.
[35] Study on Service Regulation, 39.
[36] E. Storskrubb, "What Changes Will European Procedural Harmonization Bring?”, paper presented at the IAPL conference, 2009, p. 10.
[37] A. Uzelac, "Harmonised Civil Procedure in a World of Structural Divergences? Lessons Learned from the CEPEF Evaluations”, available online at http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/728/chp%253A10.1007%252F978-90-6704-817-0_9.pdf?auth66=1364761289_30d3331d96736f26305d18e8d4d96ace&ext=.pdf, (accessed on 16 March 2013),2012, p. 201.
[38] E. Storskrubb, "What Changes Will European Procedural Harmonization Bring?”, paper presented at the IAPL conference, 2009, pp. 12-13.
[39] E. Storskrubb, "What Changes Will European Procedural Harmonization Bring?”, paper presented at the IAPL conference, 2009, pp. 12-13.
[40] R. Baldwin, M. Cave and M. Lodge, Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy and Practice, 2nd edition, OUP, Oxford, 2013, p. 78.
[41] D. Sokol, "Limiting Anticompetitive Government Interventions That Benefit Special Interests”, 17 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 119, 2009-2010, p. 128.
[42] R. Baldwin, M. Cave and M. Lodge, Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy and Practice, 2nd edition, OUP, Oxford, 213, p. 321-326.
[43] J. Stern, "The Evaluation of Regulatory Agencies”, in R. Baldwin, M. Cave and M. Lodge, The Oxford Handbook of Regulation, 2012, p. 224.
[44] H. Buch-Hansen and A. Wigger, The Politics of European Competition Regulation: a critical economy perspective, Routledge, Abingdon,2011, p. 145.
[45] F. Cengiz, Antitrust Federalism in the EU and the US, Abingdon: Routledge, 2012, p. 146.
[46] C.J. Milhaupt, "In the Shadow of Delaware? The Rise of Hostile Takeovers in Japan.” Colum. L. Rev. 105, 2005, p. 2171.