Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the effects of Article 3 of Directive 1/2019 when transposing it by Member States. The incompleteness and vagueness of Article 3 of Directive 2019/1 could cause non-harmonization in the various EU Member States, especially those in Eastern Europe, of the right of defence for the defendant party in the antitrust procedure. More specifically, to avoid this effect, Member States must adapt to European standards. In doing so, the paper intends to shed some light on how the right of defence is protected by the European Commission during competition proceedings.
Highlights
This study focuses its attention exclusively on Article 3 of Directive 2019/1 which protects the right of defence in the context of competition proceedings
Directive 2019/1 pursues the aim of harmonizing the powers and functions of National Competition Authorities in all Member States
Member States should keep in mind how the right of defence is protected by European rules, how it is applied by the European Commission and how the Court of Justice interprets it
Summary
This study focuses its attention exclusively on Article 3 of Directive 2019/1 which protects the right of defence in the context of competition proceedings. Directive 2019/1 pursues the aim of harmonizing the powers and functions of National Competition Authorities in all Member States. 113 and challenges of Article 3 of Directive 2019/1 (section 3); to reconstruct how the right of defence is protected on the basis of European norms and the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (section 4). This reconstruction is important, as it highlights which indications the Member States should keep in mind when each of them adopts Directive 2019/1 to avoid creating fragmentation in terms of rights (section 5)
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 call
