Relevant bibliographies by topics / Antitrust law – Germany

Academic literature on the topic 'Antitrust law – Germany'

Author: Grafiati
Published: 10 March 2023

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Contents

Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Antitrust law – Germany.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Journal articles on the topic "Antitrust law – Germany"

1

Marković-Bajalović, Dijana. "The EU institutional model of competition law enforcement evisited: How much rule of law suffices?" Pravni zapisi 13, no. 2 (2022): 500–535. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/pravzap0-40075.

Full text
Abstract:
The EU model of competition law enforcement has been criticized by many authors ever since antitrust provisions in the EEC Treaty became effective. The fundamental contradiction between the high level of fines threatened (and often imposed) for antitrust violations and the administrative, inquisitorial procedure for investigating antitrust offences and imposing sanctions has principally inspired the critics. The compatibility of the EU model with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR) was disputed, instigating the EU institutions to take steps to improve the institutional and procedural framework for applying competition rules. This process has not been completed yet. Directive 2019/1 raised additional controversies regarding the compliance of variegated national enforcement models with the rule of law. This article aims to analyze the genesis of the competition enforcement model in the EU, which materialized mainly through the EU secondary legislation and ECJ case law. We evaluate the EU model against the enforcement system imagined by the Ordoliberal school of thought and, secondly, against administrative models existing in two "old" Member States, in which the rule of law has deeply rooted - France and Germany. We conclude by identifying the most cumbersome deficiencies of the EU model and proposing possible solutions for eliminating them.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Wurmnest, Wolfgang. "A New Era for Private Antitrust Litigation in Germany? A Critical Appraisal of the Modernized Law against Restraints of Competition." German Law Journal 6, no. 8 (August 1, 2005): 1173–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200014218.

Full text
Abstract:
On July 1st, 2005, the 7th Amendment to the Law against Restraints of Competition (Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen – GWB) became effective. The modernization of the GWB was indispensable in bringing German law in line with Regulation (EC) No. 1/2003. Regulation 1/2003 decentralized the enforcement of EC competition rules and aimed to pave the way for effective private antitrust litigation in Europe. Thus far, private parties have invoked Art. 81 and 82 EC Treaty primarily as shield by arguing that certain agreements were void. Only in very few instances were those rules used as sword to sue infringers for injunctive relief or damages. To stimulate private enforcement, Regulation 1/2003 inter alia abolished the European Commission's exclusive power to exempt practices which are prohibited pursuant to Art. 81 (1) EC Treaty and entitled national competition authorities and courts to apply Art. 81 (3) EC Treaty. Moreover, it empowered the European Commission to make written submissions in antitrust cases pending before national courts. In line with the new European approach, the German legislature has overhauled the hitherto existing rules of German competition law considerably. This article will briefly describe the general changes brought by the reform and take a closer look at the amended rules relating to private antitrust litigation before German courts.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Gerber, David J., and John O. Haley. "Antitrust in Germany and Japan, the First Fifty Years, 1947-1998." American Journal of Comparative Law 52, no. 2 (2004): 501. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4144460.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Chukurov, D., and N. Kobadze. "Overview of latest amendmentsto the competition law of Germany." Russian competition law and economy, no. 1 (March 30, 2018): 70–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.32686/2542-0259-2018-1-70-76.

Full text
Abstract:
Over the past 20 years, the Act against Restraints of Competition in Germany has been repeatedly adapted to changing market conditions. In particular, the guidance from the European Union has led to extensive reforms. This article is dedicated to the ninth and most recent amendment dated 09.03.2017, which was accompanied by a vivid politi- cal debate. The amendment is primarily a response to the progressive digitalization of markets. Thus, the competition law of Germany becomes the first regime in the world to provide rules for the digital economy.In addition, the amendment provides for significant changes regarding the imposition of antitrust penalties, actions for damages and ministerial approval of mergers. In the case of damages claims, the reason for the amendment was the transposition of European Direc- tive No. 2014/104/EU. Generally, the legislator addressed the shortcomings, which arose during the practical application of the law. This article provides an overview of the signifi- cant modifications to the Act against Restraints of Competition in Germany, in view of its latest amendment, and considers the legal consequences of those modifications.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Davidow, Joel. "Recent Developments in US Antitrust." World Competition 28, Issue 3 (September 1, 2005): 299–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/woco2005019.

Full text
Abstract:
A major issue for US antitrust enforcement in the last year or so has been how to achieve maximum detection and deterrence of cartels, even at the cost of weakening certain sanctions. Thus, new legislation protects first-to-confess price fixers from criminal penalties and from trebling of damages owed to customers. To the same end, US enforcement agencies have sought to cut back the ability of foreign victims of the non-US aspects of worldwide cartels to obtain damage relief in American courts. This approach has been justified primarily as facilitating the operation of leniency policies by decreasing the scope, or uncertainty, of the private damage action consequences of confession. Closing US courts to foreign victims has also been justified in terms of the expressed wishes of the US allies (e.g. Germany, Japan, Canada) to fashion their own private remedy policies for their residents. In merger enforcement, trends are steady, but many litigated merger cases were decided against the Government, which could not always support its theories of probable consumer injury with hard facts. Cases involving misuse of intellectual property continue to be aggressively fought, particularly where dubious means are used to enshrine a patented invention as part of an industry standard. US efforts toward international cooperation and harmonisation have had a steady pattern of achievement, but some difficult issues of policy and practice seem intractable, particularly centralisation of merger control and harmonisation of approaches to private remedies.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Botta, Marco, and Klaus Wiedemann. "The Interaction of EU Competition, Consumer, and Data Protection Law in the Digital Economy: The Regulatory Dilemma in the Facebook Odyssey*." Antitrust Bulletin 64, no. 3 (July 25, 2019): 428–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0003603x19863590.

Full text
Abstract:
This article analyzes the interaction of EU competition, consumer and data protection law in the digital economy. We compare the objectives, rules and enforcement structures of these legal regimes, and we discuss market failures that justify regulatory intervention in digital markets. In particular, the Facebook investigations in Germany and Italy are selected as a case study. The Bundeskartellamt’s investigations are remarkable, being the first in which an exploitative abuse of dominance involving a digital platform has been decided under competition law. These we compare with their Italian counterpart, where the AGCM has recently sanctioned Facebook for behavior similar to that investigated in Germany. Yet, the Italian case has been decided under consumer, rather than competition law. This shows the regulatory dilemma faced by European antitrust authorities, which are currently struggling to find a solution to the market failures arising in digital markets.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Arroyo Aparicio, Alicia. "Productos de lujo y distribución a través de plataformas de internet desde el Derecho Europeo de la Competencia (TJUE C-230/16, Asunto Coty) = Luxury products and distribution through internet platforms from the European Competition Law (ECJ C-230/16, Coty Case)." CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL 11, no. 1 (March 11, 2019): 663. http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2019.4637.

Full text
Abstract:
Resumen: Este estudio analiza la jurisprudencia del TJUE referida a los acuerdos de distribución se­lectiva de productos cosméticos de lujo y la compatibilidad de la restricción de las ventas de esos produc­tos a través de plataformas de internet (on line) con el Derecho protector de la libre competencia de la UE. Se tiene en cuenta en particular la Sentencia de 6 de diciembre de 2017, Asunto Coty Germany GbmH c. Parfümerie Akzente GmbH, si bien se observa la jurisprudencia en general así como desde la recaída en el Asunto Metro hasta dicha sentencia. Tres cuestiones son destacadas: distribución selectiva y Derecho de la Competencia; la compatibilidad de la prohibición de comercializar en plataformas de internet –“amazon.de” es la plataforma concreta del Asunto Coty– y la interconexión con el Derecho de marcas.Palabras clave: distribución selectiva, plataformas de venta en internet, productos de lujo, Dere­cho de la Competencia, Asunto Coty.Abstract: This study analyzes EJC Case Law referring to the selective distribution agreements of luxury cosmetic products and the compatibility of the restriction of sales of these products through onli­ne platforms, under the perspective of Antitrust European Law. In particular, the Judgment of December 6, 2017, Coty Germany GbmH c. Parfümerie Akzente GmbH is considered, but also it is important to take into account the evolution from Metro Case to Coty. Three issues are highlighted: selective distri­bution and Competition Law, compatibility of the prohibition to market on internet platforms - “amazon.de” was the specific platform in Coty- Case and the interconnection with the Trademarks Law.Keywords: selective distribution, on line sales and platform bans, Antitrust Law, Coty Case.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Möschel, Wernhard. "Use of Economic Evidence in Antitrust Litigation in the Federal Republic of Germany." Antitrust Bulletin 32, no. 2 (June 1987): 523–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0003603x8703200208.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Wolski, Dominik. "The Principle of Liability in Private Antitrust Enforcement in Selected European States in Light of the Implementation of the Damages Directive into the Polish Legal System." Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies 9, no. 14 (2016): 69–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.7172/1689-9024.yars.2016.9.14.3.

Full text
Abstract:
In the vast majority of European countries, private antitrust enforcement falls under general rules of civil law. One of the issues to be discussed in relation to this type of litigation is the principle of liability, which exists in the given legal system, and its presumed impact on private enforcement. This problem has been debated in the course of the implementation works on the Damages Directive into the Polish legal system. A discussion on the principle of liability has taken place at least twice in this context. First, the issue was considered by the Civil Law Codification Commission and expressed in its Assumptions behind the Draft Act on complaints for damages caused by the breach of competition law. Subsequently, the principle of liability was assessed again at the reconciliation conference held at the Ministry of Justice. This is but a part of a broader discussion about the relationship between the rule of liability existing in national laws being applied to private enforcement cases and EU law as well as limitations arising from the latter. After outlining this interplay, the paper will briefly introduce solutions adopted with respect to the principle of liability in the context of private enforcement in selected European countries. The selection is not random, despite the fact that a limited number of countries has been analysed – eight including Poland. These include the most advanced EU Member States when it comes to private antitrust enforcement (such as the UK, Germany or the Netherlands), along with less developed examples (such as Italy or France), and even underdeveloped countries when it comes to the number and popularity of private antitrust litigations (such as Lithuania and Poland). This sort of analysis paints a relatively comprehensive picture of the adopted solutions in relation to the principles of liability governing private enforcement cases in Europe. The same is true for the issue of the burden of proof and presumptions/binding power in civil proceedings of decisions issued by competition authorities. Furthermore, what seemed to be crucial for the drafters of the Damages Directive, this sort of analysis makes it possible to formulate certain conclusions with respect to the relationship between the effectiveness of private enforcement in a given State and the adopted principle of liability. The final conclusions understandably focus on the Polish example, that is, the implementation of the Damages Directive into the Polish legal system.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Suyawan, Meirani, and Kurnia Togar Pandapotan Tanjung. "ON PROPOSAL TO REGULATE ABUSE OF SUPERIOR BARGAINING POSITION: LESSONS FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS." Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 50, no. 1 (July 13, 2020): 145. http://dx.doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol50.no1.2487.

Full text
Abstract:
The latest version of the draft bill regarding Law on the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition has added new arrangements about the abuse of a superior bargaining position. The new law proposal which is intended to amend existing Indonesian competition law (Law Number 5 Year 1999) stipulates that any business actor is prohibited from abuse its superior bargaining position within a partnership agreement with other less dominant entities. Under Law Number 20 Year 2008 on Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises, a partnership agreement means any agreement made between micro, small and medium enterprises and large enterprises like state or privately owned national businesses, joint ventures and foreign businesses that conduct economic activities in Indonesia. For example under the Indonesian Minister of State-Owned Enterprises (SoE) Regulation No. 7 of 2015, the SoE is obligated to arrange a business partnership agreement with small scale enterprise. Unlike the arrangements on abuse of dominant position which requires the establishment of monopoly power or dominance in a relevant market, the abuse of superior bargaining position may exist without market power and only required competition authority to detect whether there is any exploitation by the counterparty in a relatively stronger bargaining position. Such a condition makes many antitrust experts or economists question the relevancy of regulating abuse of superior bargaining position under competition law. However, several jurisdictions –Japan, Korea, Taiwan, France, and Germany- have regulated the abuse of superior bargaining position under their national competition laws
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Antitrust law – Germany"

1

Payne, Bridget Áine. "State-Financed Merger and Acquisition Activity in Germany as a Catalyst for Robust Chinese Patent Law Enforcement." Scholarship @ Claremont, 2018. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/scripps_theses/1171.

Full text
Abstract:
Germany’s economic dominance in Europe, generous investment incentives, and technical manufacturing prowess has encouraged an influx of Chinese-led inbound activity, concentrated in high-tech sector mergers and acquisitions. A close examination of these M&As yields evidence of systemic Chinese state-financing through both state-owned and private vehicles that likely stems from China’s “Made in China 2025” policy, which hopes to stem capital outflow and to indigenize technological innovation. As Germany braces for what it sees to be continuous attempts by China to take patented German technology through M&As, it worries that Chinese patent law will allow for rampant patent infringement by copycat Chinese entities. This paper presents an overview of the root causes of China’s heavy economic activity in Germany, as well as an analysis of the legal concerns held by German firms based on a close reading of the Patent Law of the People’s Republic of China and strategic recommendations for German companies hoping to work with or in China.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

JANISCH, Sonja. "Online-Werbung : Wettbewerbsrechtliche Beurteilung von Werbeformen im Internet." Doctoral thesis, 2002. http://hdl.handle.net/1814/5528.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Books on the topic "Antitrust law – Germany"

1

Raybould, D. M. Law of monopolies: Competition law andpractice in USA, EEC, Germany and the UK. London: Graham & Trotman, 1991.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Antitrust in Germany and Japan: The first fifty years, 1947-1998. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Die Neuordnung des Vergaberechtsschutzes unterhalb der EU-Auftragsschwellenwerte - ein Modell de lege ferenda: Zugleich eine kritische Auseinandersetzung mit dem kartellrechtlichen Vergaberechtsschutz. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2001.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Wamser, Frank. Enforcement of antitrust law: A comparison of the legal and factual situation in Germany, the EEC, and the USA. Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang, 1993.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

(West), Germany. German industrial property, copyright and antitrust laws: Legal texts. 2nd ed. Weinheim, Germany: VCH, 1989.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Friedrich-Karl, Beier, Schricker Gerhard 1935-, Fikentscher Wolfgang 1928-, and Max-Planck-Institut für Ausländisches und Internationales Patent-, Urheber- und Wettbewerbsrecht., eds. German industrial property, copyright, and antitrust laws: Legal texts. 2nd ed. Weinheim, Federal Republic of Germany: VCH, 1989.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Policy and methods in German and American antitrust law: A comparative study. New York: Praeger, 1986.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Investigations et sanctions en droit de la concurrence: Étude de droit comparé. Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang, 1994.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Antitrust auf deutsch: Der Einfluss der amerikanischen Aliierten auf das Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen (GWB) nach 1945. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Die Marktbeherrschungsvermutungen und die Amtsuntersuchungspflicht des Bundeskartellamtes. München: V. Florentz, 1986.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Book chapters on the topic "Antitrust law – Germany"

1

Sosnitza, Olaf. "Germany." In LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition, 417–28. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55813-4_22.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Hoeren, Thomas. "Germany." In LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition, 437–61. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71419-6_19.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Hoeren, Thomas. "Germany." In LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition, 157–85. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71419-6_7.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Hoeren, Thomas. "Germany." In LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition, 579–604. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27158-3_25.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Bueren, Eckart. "Germany." In LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition, 203–47. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27158-3_8.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Hartmann-Rüppel, Marco. "Germany." In LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition, 207–20. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45753-5_10.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

König, Carsten. "Germany." In Liability for Antitrust Law Infringements & Protection of IP Rights in Distribution, 149–69. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17550-4_5.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Tremml, Bernd, and Andreas Meisterernst. "Antitrust Law in the European Community." In Key Aspects of German Business Law, 177–89. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24776-0_17.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Tremml, Bernd, and Andreas Meisterernst. "Antitrust Law in the European Community." In Key Aspects of German Business Law, 171–82. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-08065-8_16.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Augenhofer, Susanne. "German Report." In LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition, 507–29. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45753-5_26.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
You might also be interested in the extended bibliographies on the topic 'Antitrust law – Germany' for particular source types:
Journal articles Books
We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!

To the bibliography