The analysis in this document is sought to analyze and assess the problems of constitutional significance' in the field of ?joint ventures assessment' under EC competition law. Therefore, we shall hold a systematic chronological order of reasoning manifesting the complexities in exercising the law. Thereafter, a detailed description on the various stages developed in this field of law mainly focusing on the emergence of issues and the solutions presented by the institutions to solve them will be put forth as it provides some good evidence for a situation in which it is hard to find an institutional balance in terms of legal certainty, competences, democratic legitimacy and separation of powers.
[...] On the other hand it tried also to reform the 1990 Interface Notice[xvi] to stop the surrounding criticisms. Commission made clear its willingness to improve the concentrative- cooperative distinction to include more joint ventures within the Merger Regulation control”[xvii]. The same issues of formal certainty appeared again in this field, but at least the Commission proposed a procedure that would improve the undertakings' decision-makers situation while creating little legal certainty. In 1996 the Commission wanted to improve the distinction. It confirmed in its 1996 Green PAPER[xviii] that cooperative full-function joint ventures involve a ‘significant change in the structure of the companies concerned and they may have in this respect, similar effects on the market structure than concentrative' ones. [...]
[...] Some academics argue that the first experiences of joint ventures were initiated by the Commission under Article 85 EC (now 81 EC). Indeed, J. Kirkbride and T. Xiong state that in its early assessments of joint ventures, the Commission considered the “inherent detrimental effects” of joint ventures to competition and concluded that Article 81(1) was “clearly applicable to joint arrangements”[ii]. Surprisingly, the Commission adopted a reverse reasoning in its 1966 Memorandum: is fair to say that whether there is, in law, a concentration or an agreement depends on the facts, but . [...]
[...] C. Ahlborn and V. Turner, Expanding Success? Reform of the EC Merger Regulation, E.C.L.R 1998. References Fourth Report on Competition Policy, point 37. See J. Kirkbride and T. Xiong, The European Control of Joint Ventures: An Historic Opportunity or a Mere Continuation of Existing Practice?, E.L.Rev., (1998) 23, p [iii] Memorandum on the problem of concentration in the common market, Competition Series, Study No Brussels 1966, quoted by J. Kirkbride and T. Xiong. [...]
[...] See J. Kirkbride and T. Xiong, cited above. Geert A. Zonnekeyn, The Treatment of Joint Ventures Under the Amended EC Merger Regulation, ECLR (1998) 7. Goyder, p [vii] Council regulation 4064/89/EEC, [1989] OJ L359/1. [viii] J. Kirkbride and T. Xiong, cited above. B. [...]
[...] Chosen field: Joint ventures assessment under EC competition law. Introduction Joint ventures agreements take place when undertakings decide to build a partnership in order to share a common commercial project. Such agreements are various and can cover different levels, from a limited supply agreement that sets out a limited cooperation, to an extensive level of partnership that almost give birth to a merger situation. On legal point of view joint ventures pose very difficult analytical issues at the Community level. [...]
Bibliographie, normes APA
Citez le doc consultéLecture en ligne
et sans publicité !Contenu vérifié
par notre comité de lecture
