Antitrust Matters - July 2016

Antitrust Matters

Antitrust Matters Series

Antitrust Update

Welcome to the July issue of DLA Piper's quarterly Antitrust Matters newsletter, which brings you antitrust and competition news from all around the world.

While we reflect on the UK's decision to leave the European Union in a so-called Brexit referendum, it is fair to say that the impact on competition law (in such areas as legal privilege and substantive assessment of transactions with a UK link) will not materialise immediately. While the Brexit vote has stirred up significant debate among EU stakeholders there are no indications of an anti-UK bias so far.

Today's featured article is a global piece on global trends in combatting anti-competitive information disclosure, to which lawyers from around the globe have contributed. This issue also provides our Special Report on bid rigging in Eastern Europe followed by Global highlights.

本期通讯

  • Feature article: Signalling collusion: Global trends in combatting anticompetitive information disclosure
    18 JUL 2016

    Competition authorities have long grappled with the potential anti-competitive effects of pricing disclosures between competitors, or price signalling as it is commonly called. While some forms of pricing disclosures are legitimate and may be beneficial to consumers, other forms allow competitors to act collusively, leading to market inefficiencies that are ultimately borne by consumers.

    Many jurisdictions, including the US, UK, EU and New Zealand, do not have specific price signalling provisions, and price signalling conduct is usually prosecuted under either generic prohibitions of anti-competitive agreements, or concerted practices prohibitions. In doing so, competition authorities worldwide have sought to stretch the cartel concept to regulate anti-competitive pricing disclosures.

    Despite difficulties in accurately identifying and prosecuting anti-competitive price signalling, competition authorities continue to actively monitor and assess the impact of price disclosures; investigate and prosecute anti-competitive information disclosure and exchanges; and, where appropriate, seek undertakings from businesses to cease or alter their information sharing practices.

    As competition authorities sharpen their focus on anti-competitive price signalling, it is increasingly important for businesses to understand how their conduct may be viewed under competition laws globally.

    This article provides an overview of developments in various jurisdictions:

    • Australia
    • The European Union
    • Italy
    • The Netherlands
    • Romania
    • The US

    继续阅读
  • Special report: Eastern Europe gets serious on bid rigging
    18 JUL 2016

    Poland
    The Polish Competition Authority continues to pursue bid rigging cases

    Romania
    Romanian Competition Council issues guidance for companies participating in public tenders

    Slovakia
    Slovak Competition Authority has new powers on sanctioning bid rigging

    继续阅读