EU takes a broader view and has the goal of maintaining transparent markets and a “level playing field”. There are two main schools of thought: the predominant view is that only consumer welfare considerations are relevant treaty of the european union pdf. Article 101 TFEU does not specifically ban cartels, instead declaring as illegal all “agreements, decisions and concerted practices” which are anti-competitive and which distort the single market.
Under article 168. Developed a “concerted practice”, to promote industry. In articles 223 to 334, the following articles elaborate on the form of association such as customs duties. Within an association, there are two main schools of thought: the predominant view is that only consumer welfare considerations are relevant there.
Undertakings must then have formed an agreement, developed a “concerted practice”, or, within an association, taken a decision. Like US antitrust, this just means all the same thing. Article 101 covers agreements and anti-competitive practices that might affect “trade between Member States”. This provision has been interpreted broadly: for example, several agreements amongst firms with no production in the EU have been considered to affect trade between Member States. In the Webb-Pomerene case, EU law was applied to a US cartel with no production in the EU.
Exemptions to Article 101 behaviour fall into three categories. In practice very few official exemptions were given by the Commission and a new system for dealing with them is currently under review. Meijers Institute of Legal Studies, Leiden University. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon : Routledge, 2011. Guidelines, the CFI’s recent Glaxo Case and certain academic works, such as Okeoghene Odudu, The boundaries of EC competition law: the scope of article 101. Chris Townley, Article 101 TFEU and Public Policy, Hart Publishing, 2009. The ECJ’s judgement in the Glaxo case is eagerly awaited, for example.