Abstract
Almost fifteen years after its adoption, the system of decentralized enforcement laid down in Regulation 1/2003 has shaped competition law in a way that could hardly be predicted, in terms of both magnitude and quality of the activities of National Competition Authorities. More recently, the so-called ‘ECN+ Directive’ was adopted to address the shortcoming of such system, namely a perceived lack of independence and accountability of several NCAs and a certain degree of divergence within the European Competition Network. In this scenario, the Italian Competition Authority has frequently been depicted as a well-equipped, independent and effective enforcer and – with a few notable exceptions – the international debate concerning such reform has mostly overlooked its possible impact within the Italian legal system. This paper aims to assess whether, and to what an extent, the ECN+ Directive should affect the enforcement of competition law in Italy and, in particular, those fundamental guarantees of independence and effectiveness that form the core of the rule of law in the field of EU competition law.
Highlights
Introduction‘Fate che le leggi sian chiare, semplici, e che tutta la forza della nazione sia condensata a difenderle’
This paper aims to assess whether, and to what an extent, the ECN+ Directive should affect the enforcement of competition law in Italy and, in particular, those fundamental guarantees of independence and effectiveness that form the core of the rule of law in the field of EU competition law
The background is well-known: Regulation 1/20036 put in place a system of parallel competences, in which the NCAs of the Member States were entrusted with the task of applying EU competition rules, namely Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) alongside the Commission
Summary
‘Fate che le leggi sian chiare, semplici, e che tutta la forza della nazione sia condensata a difenderle’. According to the ECN, the efforts that brought to this result did not led to uniformity and several divergences relating to fundamental topics were still in place Both reports ended by pointing out that it was time for a further and informed debate concerning ‘to which extent a further harmonization [was] desirable or needed, taking account of the cost involved’. These recommendations and reports were crucial in delivering a wide analysis of the state of the art of public enforcement of EU competition law and are, at the heart of the Proposal, which can be seen as the output of a process of horizontal cooperation (Ghezzi, 2017). Legal frameworks for competition law enforcement10 – will improve the public enforcement of EU (and, possibly, domestic) competition law in Italy
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
