EU competition law

This subtopic provides an overview of EU competition law. It is aimed at lawyers who need a high level overview of the legal framework and key issues, and who are not specialised in Competition Law. For in-depth practical guidance on EU competition law, see the Competition Law practice area (subject to subscription).

EU competition regulation

The European Commission, in particular the Commission's Directorate-General for Competition known as 'DG Comp', is the main EU regulator tasked with enforcing and supervising EU competition law. It investigates and takes action against particular types of behaviour, for example cartel activity and dominant companies trying to leverage their market power. It also investigates merger cases.

There are four principle areas of EU competition law:

  1. the prohibition on anti-competitive agreements under Article 101 TFEU

  2. the prohibition on the abuse of a dominant position under Article 102 TFEU

  3. merger control under Regulation 139/2004, the EU Merger Regulation (EUMR), which requires the prior notification of transactions that meet the required thresholds to the European Commission

  4. the prohibition on illegal State aid under Articles 107–109 TFEU, where a Member State provides

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest EU Law News

Automated decision-making and DSARs: right to access means a right to explainability (CK v Magistrat Der Stadt Wiendun & Bradstreet Austria GMBH)

Information Law analysis: The Court of Justice provided several clarifications around the scope of data subject access requests (DSARs) in the context of automated decision-making. The court held the determining factor for whether information constitutes ‘meaningful information about the logic involved’ under Article 15(1)(h) of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR) is whether the information enables the data subject to understand the logic involved in automated decision-making involving their personal data. The court also held disclosure by controllers should be underpinned by the principles of transparency, which requires information to be clear, accessible and intelligible, both in terms of content and form, from the perspective of data subjects. In the context of automated decision-making this doesn’t necessarily mean providing the exact algorithm, if it doesn’t help the data subject’s understanding of the ‘how’. The court confirmed DSARs do not mandate the disclosure of trade secrets, but this can only be decided by the relevant supervisory authority or competent court, after assessing all relevant information provided to them by a controller. The protection of trade secrets cannot be used as a blanket excuse by businesses to withhold certain information from individuals making a request under Article 15(1)(h) of the EU GDPR. Written by Marija Nonkovic, associate at Kemp IT Law LLP.

View EU Law by content type :

Popular documents