The Shortest Competition Judgment Ever: AC-Treuhand II

Hans Vedder, Rick Johannes Busscher, Martin Herz

    Research output: Other contributionPopular

    Abstract

    Competition law judgments are notorious for their length. An extreme example is the 5134 paragraph judgment in Cement. In most cases the appeal judgment is significantly shorter, as with the 391 paragraphs in the appeal in Cement. AC-Treuhand is no exception to that rule, but it takes it to the extreme by reducing the Court’s reasoning to a single paragraph. This single paragraph supports the finding that cartel facilitators are also liable under Article 101 TFEU. The issue whether a company that is not active on the affected market should also be brought under the scope of article 101, is a difficult matter. However, the Court finds it ‘surprisingly’ easy to solve this matter, which raises practical points as well as some fundamental questions. We will discuss and comment on this one paragraph below, as well as on some of the fluff that surrounds it, but we will start with the facts.
    Original languageEnglish
    Publication statusPublished - 9-Nov-2015

    Keywords

    • Competition law
    • nulla poena

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The Shortest Competition Judgment Ever: AC-Treuhand II'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this