The Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the Future

Under the EU Merger Regulation, if the Commission has concerns that a merger may significantly affect competition in the European Union, the merging companies may propose modifications to the project that would guarantee continued competition on the market. The Commission may declare a conce...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dalia Višinskienė, Justina Nasutavičienė
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Warsaw 2017-12-01
Series:Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2017_10_16/57.pdf
id doaj-afd8d396134b429c90b7b60f1e059553
record_format Article
spelling doaj-afd8d396134b429c90b7b60f1e0595532020-11-25T02:46:57ZengUniversity of WarsawYearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies1689-90242545-01152017-12-011016577610.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2017.10.16.3The Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the FutureDalia Višinskienė0Justina Nasutavičienė1The Supreme Administrative Court of LithuaniThe Supreme Administrative Court of LithuaniUnder the EU Merger Regulation, if the Commission has concerns that a merger may significantly affect competition in the European Union, the merging companies may propose modifications to the project that would guarantee continued competition on the market. The Commission may declare a concentration compatible with the common market following such a modification by the parties and attach to its decision conditions and obligations intended to ensure that the undertakings comply with the commitments. In other words, commitments have to be offered by the parties but the Commission may introduce conditions and obligations if they are required to ensure the enforceability of commitments.Meanwhile the scope to propose merger modifications and the level of discretion of the competition authority are quite different under the Law on Competition of the Republic of Lithuania, adopted almost two decades ago. The goal of this paper is to reveal those differences and, with the help of the jurisprudence of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania in the Gazprom case, to explain how this may impact future cases.https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2017_10_16/57.pdfcommitmentsconcentrationseu competition lawlaw on competition of the republic of lithuaniamerger regulationthe gazprom case
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Dalia Višinskienė
Justina Nasutavičienė
spellingShingle Dalia Višinskienė
Justina Nasutavičienė
The Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the Future
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
commitments
concentrations
eu competition law
law on competition of the republic of lithuania
merger regulation
the gazprom case
author_facet Dalia Višinskienė
Justina Nasutavičienė
author_sort Dalia Višinskienė
title The Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the Future
title_short The Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the Future
title_full The Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the Future
title_fullStr The Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the Future
title_full_unstemmed The Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the Future
title_sort gazprom case: lessons of the past for the future
publisher University of Warsaw
series Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
issn 1689-9024
2545-0115
publishDate 2017-12-01
description Under the EU Merger Regulation, if the Commission has concerns that a merger may significantly affect competition in the European Union, the merging companies may propose modifications to the project that would guarantee continued competition on the market. The Commission may declare a concentration compatible with the common market following such a modification by the parties and attach to its decision conditions and obligations intended to ensure that the undertakings comply with the commitments. In other words, commitments have to be offered by the parties but the Commission may introduce conditions and obligations if they are required to ensure the enforceability of commitments.Meanwhile the scope to propose merger modifications and the level of discretion of the competition authority are quite different under the Law on Competition of the Republic of Lithuania, adopted almost two decades ago. The goal of this paper is to reveal those differences and, with the help of the jurisprudence of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania in the Gazprom case, to explain how this may impact future cases.
topic commitments
concentrations
eu competition law
law on competition of the republic of lithuania
merger regulation
the gazprom case
url https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2017_10_16/57.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT daliavisinskiene thegazpromcaselessonsofthepastforthefuture
AT justinanasutaviciene thegazpromcaselessonsofthepastforthefuture
AT daliavisinskiene gazpromcaselessonsofthepastforthefuture
AT justinanasutaviciene gazpromcaselessonsofthepastforthefuture
_version_ 1724755573712355328