Cross-border: Competition and Antitrust

This Law Firm Publication by Herbert Smith focuses on the main developments in the antitrust landscape in China. The Anti-Monopoly Law came into effect in 2008, and since then regular enforcements have been made to combat anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominance and restrictive mergers. The main regulators of the legislation so far have included MOFCOM and NDRC, however it is likely private enforcement will increase in the future.

Article 102 of the TFEU (formerly Article 82 of the EC Treaty) prohibits abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within a market in the EU or a substantial part of the EU. There have been recent important developments in Article 102 enforcement, in particular, demonstrating the European Commission's (Commission) move towards an approach based more on the effect of market practices rather than their form. This resulted in the Commission issuing Guidance on the Commission's enforcement priorities in applying Article 102 to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings (Guidance), published on 3 December 2008. This article reviews recent developments in the application of Article 102 in the context of the Guidance, and goes on to consider areas not covered by the Guidance. Against this background, the article considers: Dominance. Exclusionary abuses: general framework of the Guidance. Status of the Guidance. Exclusive dealing and rebates (Intel). Tying and bundling. Predation (France Télécom). Refusal to supply and margin squeeze. Areas not covered by the Guidance:  For example:    discrimination (Clearstream); exploitative abuses: DSD and patent licensing cases;  other abuses: EC pharmaceutical inquiry.   Remedies.  

This Law Firm Publication by Mallesons Stephen Jaques considers the key elements  of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s (ACCC) recently released Compliance and Enforcement Policy for 2012. The Policy provides clear guidance on its enforcement policies, as well as outlining the factors the ACCC will give priority to when deciding whether to undertake enforcement activity. The Policy also confirms that, where appropriate, the ACCC will take action to clarify or rest the law.

On 3 March 2011, the African Competition Forum (ACF) was launched in Nairobi, Kenya. The ACF is an association of African competition agencies that has been formed to promote competition policy awareness in Africa.

It was reported on the official website of British Embassy in China that the UK’s Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has agreed a memorandum of understanding with China’s State Administration for Industry & Commerce (SAIC).

On 15 July 2009, the National Executive Power of Argentina sent to the National Congress a bill for the execution of the Co-operation Agreement between Argentina and the Federative Republic of Brazil on co-operation between their Antitrust Authorities in the application of their antitrust laws, signed in Buenos Aires on 16 October 2003 (the Co-operation Agreement).

In Folien Fischer AG and another v RITRAMA SpA [2012] C-133/11, Advocate General Jääskinen delivered the Opinion that Article 5(3) of the Brussels Regulation (covering matters relating to tort) does not confer jurisdiction where an alleged wrongdoer brings an action for a declaration that the alleged victim has no claim in tort.

This article discusses the possibility that, if an OS solution or platform has considerable market power or is a de facto standard in a relevant market, the OS licence's terms (requiring redistribution free of charge) and/or the GPL's Copyleft provisions might be found to be exclusionary or unfair to a non-OS operator who is an intellectual property (IP) right holder. The article focuses specifically on the arguments surrounding unfair and/or exclusionary terms of access to a market, by looking at the way in which this issue has previously been assessed in the context of standard setting.

On 8 October 2009, the Brazilian competition authorities and the Directorate General of  Competition (DG Competition) of the Commission of the European Union signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which provides for a framework for administrative co-operation, dialogue and exchange of information and experiences between DG Competition and the Brazilian competition authorities.

On 5 October 2004, Canada and the United States signed a positive comity agreement for the enforcement of competition laws between the two countries. See further Legal update: United States and Canada agree to enhanced anti-trust co-operation.

On 7 September 2005, the governments of Canada and Japan, represented by their respective competition agencies, signed an agreement to facilitate co-operation between the competition agencies in the enforcement of their competition laws. The Agreement is similar to accords that Canada has signed in the anti-trust area with the US, EC and Mexico.

An overview of the anti-trust rules applicable to mergers and acquisitions in Canada, focusing on public bids in particular.

This Law Firm Publication by Norton Rose focuses on the Australian Competition and Consumers Commission’s circular, which aimed to remind organisations in the mining industry of the potential sanctions for prohibited cartel conduct. The prohibitions fall under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 and carry substantial fines under the prescribed penalty regime.

Is your business potentially exposed to a cartel damages action or has it suffered loss due to another party's illegal cartel activity? This article examines the issues facing defendants and claimants in cartel damages actions.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Australia. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Brazil. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in China. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel Leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Finland. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Germany. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. 

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Hong Kong. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Indonesia. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, whether immunity from civil fines is available for individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Japan. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Norway. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel Leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in the Russian Federation. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in South Korea. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel Leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Switzerland. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel Leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in Turkey. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to cartel leniency law in the Ukraine. The Q&A gives a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities. In particular, it covers the conditions to be satisfied, the method of making an application, availability of immunity from civil fines to individuals, the scope of leniency, circumstances when leniency may be withdrawn, leniency plus, confidentiality and disclosure, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Cartel leniency Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As, which provide a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. 

This tool enables subscribers to search the Country Q&A in the PLC Cartel leniency multi-jurisdictional guide by question and jurisdiction. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "submit" button. Please note that the law stated dates for each jurisdiction covered may not be the same. To check the law stated dates for each jurisdiction, please visit the individual article. Please also note this project is currently being updated so the Q&A tool will not include all available jurisdictions in this subject area.

On 27 September 2012, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the US Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to promote co-operation and communication amongst the competition agencies in both countries.

This Law Firm Publication by Mallesons Stephen Jaques focuses on recent regulatory reforms in China which are set to heavily enforce the current competition laws and procedures. The reforms allow scope for new fines as well as investigations into non-compliant corporations. China’s competition developments have been prominent over the last 6 months, and firms operating in the territory should address any potential risk areas that could cause reason for investigation and substantial fines.

On 27 July 2011, the Antitrust Division of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) and the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on antitrust co-operation with their Chinese counterparts, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the Chinese State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC).

This Law Firm Publication by Herbert Smith examines some of the difficulties associated with the applying the Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) to State-Owned Enterprises (SOE) and the growing interest which the European Commission is taking in cases involving foreign direct investment by SOEs.

The recent preliminary ruling in the Provimi case cleared the way for foreign claimants to commence civil litigation in England against European cartel members. This article analyses the features of the case and considers its implications. For further analysis of recent developments in relation to private antitrust remedies, see www.practicallaw.com/A28534.

The Department of Trade and Industry and the Office of Fair Trading have announced that they are entering into co-operation agreements with the Canadian, Australian and New Zealand competition and consumer authorities.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that, although a ban on cold calling is a restriction on the freedom to provide cross-border services in the EC, the need to protect investors may justify the imposition of such a ban.

On 26 February 2004, the Council of Ministers adopted a Regulation which gives the European Commission jurisdiction to apply EC competition rules to air transport between the European Union and third countries.

On 6 December 2006, the European Commission published for consultation a green paper on the application of EC anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard measures legislation in a changing global economy.

On 20 September 2012, the European Commission announced that the Commission has signed a Memorandum of Understanding between the Directorate General for Competition of the European Commission (DG Competition) and the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (SAIC) of China.

On 9 October 2009, the European Commission announced that Neelie Kroes, Competition Commissioner, has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Brazil.

This Law Firm Publication by Freehills looks at the Competition Appeal Board of Singapore's first decision against a company for market dominance abuse under the Competition Act. The Board imposed sanctions against SISTIC, the country's premier ticketing services provider, due to the company enforcing its own exclusivity clauses to eliminate any competition.

One year on from the entry into force of the EC Modernisation Regulation, this article reviews the impact of the reform so far on business, and considers the strategic issues to be considered in the changed competition law environment.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Australia. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Brazil. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims; exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Canada. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Cyprus. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool.  This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in the EU. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in France. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Greece. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in India. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Israel. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Japan. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. For a full list of recommended competition law firms and lawyers in Japan, please visit PLC Which lawyer? To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Norway. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Romania. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in South Africa. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Spain. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Switzerland. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in the UK (England and Wales). The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

A Q&A guide to competition law in the United States. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. In particular, it covers relevant triggering events and thresholds, notification requirements, procedures and timetables, third party claims, exclusions and exemptions, penalties for breach, and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Competition law Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of jurisdictional Competition Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg. For a full list of jurisdictional Cartel Leniency Q&As, which provide a succinct overview of leniency and immunity, the applicable procedure and the regulatory authorities in multiple jurisdictions, visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg.

This tool enables subscribers to search the Country Q&A in the PLC Competition multi-jurisdictional guide by question and jurisdiction. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "submit" button. Please note that the law stated dates for each jurisdiction covered may not be the same. To check the law stated dates for each jurisdiction, please visit the individual article. Please also note this project is currently being updated so the Q&A tool will not include all available jurisdictions in this subject area.

The Kimberly-Clark/Scott merger case involved an exceptional degree of co-operation between the European Commission and national competition authorities. This article analyses the case and examines whether this could be the beginning of a trend in merger cases.

A Q&A guide to competition law in Belgium. The Q&A gives a high level overview of merger control, restrictive agreements and practices, monopolies and abuse of market power, and joint ventures. It covers relevant triggering events and thresholds; notification requirements, procedures and timetables; third party claims; exclusions and exemptions; penalties for breach; and proposals for reform. For a full list of recommended competition law firms and lawyers in Belgium, please visit PLC Which lawyer? This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competitionhandbook.

This Q&A provides country-specific commentary on Practice note, Competition: International Acquisitions, and forms part of our international acquisitions transaction guide.

This Q&A provides country-specific commentary on Practice note, Competition: International Acquisitions, and forms part of our international acquisitions transaction guide.

This Q&A provides country-specific commentary on Practice note, Competition: International Acquisitions, and forms part of our international acquisitions transaction guide.

This Q&A provides country-specific commentary on Practice note, Competition: International Acquisitions, and forms part of our international acquisitions transaction guide.

This Q&A provides country-specific commentary on Practice note, Competition: International Acquisitions, and forms part of our international acquisitions transaction guide.

This Q&A provides country-specific commentary on Practice note, Competition: International Acquisitions, and forms part of our international acquisitions transaction guide.

This chapter is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition. On 14 December 2010 the European Commission (Commission) published its revised Guidelines on the applicability of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to horizontal co-operation agreements (OJ 2011 C11/01) (EU Guidelines). This chapter covers the underlying approach; Focus area A: information exchange; Focus area B: co-marketing and co-selling; other areas of interest; and key areas of convergence and divergence. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competitionhandbook.

Anti-cartel enforcement has been the subject of increased focus in recent years. This has led to the development of stricter systems and tougher penalties. This chapter examines aspects of the criminal provisions relating to cartel conduct in Canada, the US, the UK and Australia, including criminal penalties, types of cartel conduct, possible defences, corporate exposure to criminal prosecution and methods of reducing this exposure.

The Office of Fair Trading has announced plans to investigate Visa’s cross-border interchange fees and the European Commission has sent MasterCard a statement of objections relating to its cross-border interchange fees.

The European Commission has imposed total fines of approximately €1.47 billion on seven international groups of companies producing cathode ray tubes.

The European Commission has opened formal antitrust proceedings to investigate whether or not the German railway incumbent Deutsche Bahn AG and several of its subsidiaries operate an anti-competitive pricing system for traction current in Germany.

The European Commission has concluded a Phase II investigation into the proposed merger between Deutsche Börse and NYSE Euronext by prohibiting the proposed merger.

On 15 February 2010, Christine A. Varney, Assistant Attorney General of the Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division, gave a speech at the Institute of Competition Law New Frontiers of Antitrust Conference in Paris, France.  Varney's speech focused on the need for antitrust agencies around the world to work together to review international mergers and assess effective remedies.

The European Court of Justice has dismissed the appeals brought by Dutch brewers Heineken NV and Bavaria NV against the EU General Court’s judgment of 2011 regarding their alleged participation in a cartel on the Dutch beer market.

This chapter considers the main instruments used for implementation of the merger control regime in the EU, and includes an overview of non-horizontal merger guidelines, recent significant European Commission decisions, recent judgments of the Court of First Instance and the European Court of Justice, and the future of merger proceedings.

On 29 November 2012, the European Commission published two reports prepared by the European Competition Network (ECN) on respectively investigative powers and decision-making powers.

This Law Firm Publication by Jones Day looks at a recently approved new competition law that will significantly alter the landscape of competition enforcement in Brazil.  The new law aims to generally benefit the Brazilian competition system as well as companies and corporations intending to do business in Brazil.

This chapter provides an overview of the EU market review procedure under its telecommunications regulatory framework, including an analysis of the concept of significant market power, a summary of the decisions of national regulatory authorities and a consideration of the proposals for reform within this sector.

This Practice note considers the impact of the European Union's enlargement on the enforcement of EU competition policy.

The impact of EU state aid rules on all fields of the law and economy has become particularly apparent due to the financial crisis. State aid law plays an increasing role in the area of public services and public private partnerships (PPPs), and in such fields as tax law and environmental law. It is also used by the European Commission (Commission) to restructure entire industry sectors, in particular the European banking sector. This chapter provides a summary of the current status of EU state aid law and recent developments from September 2009 to October 2010. This chapter is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competitionhandbook.

This chapter considers the impact of European energy regulatory policy on M&A in the energy sector, in particular the European Commission's initiative to create a single competitive European energy market and the likely effect of regulatory proposals on future deal activity.

In June 2005, the European Commission (Commission) launched a comprehensive reform of state aid rules and procedures in the State Aid Action Plan (SAAP). The Commission's aim was to ensure that the EC Treaty's state aid rules were better suited to encouraging member states to contribute to the Lisbon Strategy. Following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009, the state aid rules are now set out in Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU. This article discusses: The legal framework applying to EU state aid control. Proposed legislative reforms. Commission state aid policy in response to the global financial crisis and in other areas.

The Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) has been confirmed as a member of the International Competition Network (ICN) Steering Group and appointed as sole Chair of the ICN Advocacy Working Group. During the 10th Annual Conference of the ICN, the delegation of FAS Russia held  meetings with representatives of ta number of competition authorities, including those from Spain, Italy, India France and DG Competition of the European Commission.  

The Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) and the Italian Competition Authority have signed a Memorandum of Understanding.

This Law Firm Publication by Herbert Smith looks at a recently published procedural notice, issued by the French Competition Authority (FCA) concerning a change in the settlement procedure in France. The procedure enables companies subject to infringement proceeding to waive their right to challenge the charged notified by the FCA in exchange for a fine reduction of between 10-25 percent.

This Law Firm Publication by Mayer Brown LLP focuses on the recently effective Merger Control Guidelines in Germany. The Guidelines, effective as of 29 March 2012, aim to help companies better understand the issues on which the Cartel Office focuses on in merger investigations. The Guidelines will be reviewed after the amendments to current German competition legislation come into force, which are scheduled to take effect in early 2013.

The European Court of Justice has held that the UK government's 'golden share' in BAA plc contravenes EU law.

On 21 September 2011, during the 2nd BRICS International Competition Conference in Beijing, the Head of the Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia), Igor Artemyev, and the President of the Administrative Council for Economic Defence (CADE), Fernando Furlan, held a bilateral meeting and signed a Co-operation Programme.

This Law Firm Publicationby Herbert Smith focuses on the approval of the Competition Bill in Hong Kong, which introduces a cross-sector competition law regime in the country. The legislation, passed on 14 June 2012, encompasses rules that aim to curb conduct that amounts to abuse of power from those with a substantive degree of market power in Hong Kong, and will be implemented in phases over the next 12 months.

The fifth annual conference of the International Competition Network (ICN) ended on 5 May 2006 and the ICN has published a statement on the work undertaken as well as various working papers and reports submitted to the conference.

The International Competition Network (ICN) has published a statement of its mission and achievements from its establishment in 2001 until May 2005.

The fifth article in the major Global Counsel series considers the competition issues that can arise in cross-border transactions.

A consideration of how a recent decision by the US Supreme Court concerning the appeal of a convicted drug dealer may impact on the campaign by the US Department of Justice against international corporate price fixers.

The US Federal Trade Commission, Department of Justice and top foreign antitrust officials have announced the launch of a new International Competition Network.

On 19 January 2005, the government of Japan announced that it has reached an agreement with the Canadian government regarding co-operation in relation to enforcement of their respective laws regarding anti-competitive behaviour on an international basis.

Significant changes in the scope and extent of the judicial review of European Commission decisions for competition cases have occurred in recent years. These changes make the appeal of Commission decisions a more attractive alternative for undertakings, particularly in the current environment of ever-increasing fines in competition cases. This chapter provides an overview of judicial review in competition cases, considers the admissibility of annulment actions, discusses the substantive standard of review, summarises procedural issues for judicial review, discusses special procedures that are available in judicial review proceedings and summarises the key considerations for potential applicants.

The Advocate General has delivered an opinion supporting the right of the European Commission to seize and use in evidence legal advice given by in-house lawyers.

This chapter examines the proliferation of leniency programmes, the increasing number of criteria that leniency programmes have in common, some of the principal differences between leniency programmes, and co-operation in the investigation and enforcement of leniency programmes across jurisdictions.

The European Commission has opened formal proceedings to investigate whether MasterCard’s default interchange fees on payments made by non-EEA cardholders and certain other practices may be hindering competition in the EE.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Argentina. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Austria. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Brazil. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Canada. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Cyprus. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in the EU. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in France. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Greece. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Indonesia. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Italy. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Mexico. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Portugal. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in the Russian Federation. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in South Korea. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Sweden. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Turkey. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in the Ukraine. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

A flowchart providing an overview of the merger control notification process. This flowchart is part of the Q&A guide to competition law in Israel. For a full list of jurisdictional Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/competition-mjg.

The European Commission has blocked the proposed takeover of Finnish tissue producer Metsä Tissue Corp by its Swedish competitor, SCA Mölnlycke.

The General Court has upheld the fine imposed on Microsoft by the European Commission for failing to comply with the Commission’s finding that Microsoft had abused a dominant position in relation to PC operating systems.

This chapter examines some of the major challenges of making multi-jurisdictional merger control filings and how best to ensure approvals are done in an efficient and timely manner.

The questionnaire provides examples of the types of questions that may be asked of the parties to a transaction in order to obtain the information necessary to form a preliminary view of the merger control regimes that apply to a transaction.

In an environment of growing co-operation and information exchange between competition enforcement agencies, awareness of the various rules governing legal privilege in different jurisdictions is of particular importance. This chapter briefly reviews the general approaches to client-lawyer privilege in different jurisdictions, outlines the approach to legal privilege in the EU and the US, considers the issue of whether correspondence with in-house lawyers is covered by legal privilege, and provides practical advice on how to protect privileged communications in a multinational context.

This Law Firm Publication by Herbert Smith looks at a recent decision by China’s National Development and Reform Commission whereby two companies were heavily fined for breach of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law. Following other recent antitrust infringement cases and penalties, it is important for Chinese and international companies operating in China to ensure complete antitrust compliance.

This Law Firm Publication by Jones Day focuses on the new Competition rules in Italy which introduce various changes to the Italian antitrust and competition rules, originally proposed by the office of the Italian Antitrust Authority (AGCM). The new rules are based on notification and enforcement, and will be incrementally introduced throughout 2012/2013.

The following new Articles from the PLC Cross-border Competition Handbook 2007/08 and PLC Cross-border Leniency Handbook have now been added to the PLC Competition site: Cartel prosecution in the US and the EU - recent developments Criminal penalties for cartel conduct EC merger developments Judicial review in competition cases Merger remedies in the EU and US Multi-jurisdictional merger control Overview of leniency Private anti-trust remedies in the US

On 5-6 August 2010, the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) held the initial meetings in a project to approximate antimonopoly standards and the enforcement of self-regulating organisations in Russia and EU. This project forms part of the EU - Russia co-operation under the "Common Space Facility".

On 7 February 2013, the OECD published a report on discussions held at two hearings held on issues relating to the digital economy.

The European Court of First Instance has substantially confirmed the European Commission’s decision fining Opel Nederland for anti-competitive practices.

This opinion piece considers the effects of recent judicial developments in England on the future of private anti-trust enforcement in the EU.

Leniency programmes represent a key development in competition law enforcement both for competition authorities and undertakings. This chapter looks at the history, recent developments and future considerations for leniency programmes worldwide. It also sets out the key features of a successful leniency programme and the problems faced by potential leniency applicants.

On 10 April 2009, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic (SAC) overturned a judgment of the Regional Court in Brno of 25 June 2008 that had annulled a decision of the Chairman of the Czech Office for Protection of Economic Competition to impose a fine of CZK941.881 million on major worldwide producers of gas insulated switchgears (GIS) (among others Siemens, Alstom, Areva, Hitachi, Fuji Electric Systems and Toshiba) for their participation between 1988 and 2004 in a cartel for GIS projects, in breach of section 3(1) of the Czech Competition Act. At the same time, the SAC referred the case back to the Regional Court for further proceedings.

A consideration of how companies can protect their goods from parallel importers.

This Law Firm Publication by Mallesons Stephen Jaques examines the Australian Government’s recently passed Bill prohibiting price signalling. The new prohibitions on price signaling will come into force six months after the Bill receives Royal Assent for the banking industry; the only industry to which the laws will initially apply. 

This chapter considers some of the most important aspects of US private anti-trust litigation, including the basis for federal anti-trust actions in the US, anti-trust standing, key issues of private anti-trust claims, the interaction between private anti-trust actions and government enforcement, future developments, and state anti-trust laws.

This feature analyses recent developments in antitrust litigation in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK (England and Wales) and the US.

This tool enables subscribers to search the Country Q&A for EU member states in the PLC Public Procurement multi-jurisdictional guide by question and jurisdiction. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "submit" button. Please note that the law stated dates for each jurisdiction covered may not be the same. To check the law stated dates for each jurisdiction, please visit the individual article. To compare answers across non-EU jurisdictions visit the Public Procurement Country Q&A tool.

A Q&A guide to public procurement law in UK (England and Wales). The country-specific Q&A gives a high level overview of applicable legislation, recent trends, use of the four EU procurement procedures, review procedures, remedies, transparency, contracts outside the scope of Consolidated Public Service Directive and proposals for reform. To compare answers across multiple jurisdictions visit the Public Procurement Country Q&A tool and EU Public Procurement Country Q&A tool. This Q&A is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to public procurement. For a full list of jurisdictional Public Procurement Q&As visit www.practicallaw.com/publicprocurement-mjg.

The Romanian Competition Council (RCC) and the Ministry of State Administration for Industry and Trade from the Popular Republic of China (MSAIT) have signed a memorandum with the objective of intensifying the co-operation between the two institutions with regards to competition legislation and its enforcement, the exchange of experience and participation in the events organised by the both institutions.

On 22 November 2012, the European Commission published a revised version of the European Competition Network (ECN) Model Leniency Programme.

This Law Firm Publication by Goltsblat BLP examines the Government of the Russian Federation’s recently published resolution No 881 “On the procedure for setting start (maximum) prices for contracts (separate lots) for individual types of medical equipment for the purpose of their inclusion in the documentation on tenders to supply such equipment” which came into effect on 19 November 2011. The resolution approves new rules for setting given prices, which aim to help ensure anti-monopoly compliance in these types of transactions.

The Russian Federal Antimonopoly Authority (FAS Russia) and the Portuguese Competition Authority have signed a Memorandum of Understanding in the field of competition policy.

The European Commission has opened formal antitrust proceedings to investigate whether certain publishing groups have engaged in anti-competitive practices affecting the sale of e-books in the EEA.

An examination of the rise of sovereign wealth funds and the European and international efforts to establish an acceptable global operating framework.

On 18 April 2012, the European Commission published a speech by Jaoquin Almunia, Vice President of the European Commission responsible for Competition Policy, on the importance of international co-operation to fight against protectionism.

On 7 February 2008, the European Commission published a speech by Neelie Kroes, Competition Commissioner, on the role of EC competition policy in the age of globalisation. The Commissioner considers the role of the European Commission in seeking global convergence of competition law and enforcement, in particular through the application of EC competition law to global companies and bilateral and multilateral co-operation with other competition authorities.

The European Commission has published a speech by R Hewitt Pate, Assistant Attorney General at the US Department of Justice, on convergences and divergences between EU and US antitrust policy and practice. The response by Mario Monti, Competition Commissioner, has also been published.

On 3 July 2008, Neelie Kroes, Competition Commissioner, met with Heidi Grande Roys, the Norwegian Minister of Government Administration and Reform. They exchanged views on current competition and state aid issues. Neelie Kroes also met Terje Riis-Johansen, Norwegian Minister of Petroleum and Energy, to discuss various energy-related issues.

In the second article in the series, the authors explain the commercial, legal, tax and regulatory issues that will influence the structure of a cross border joint venture.

This table is part of the PLC multi-jurisdictional guide to competition and cartel leniency. For a full list of contents visit www.practicallaw.com/leniency-mjg. Please note this project is currently being updated so will not include all available jurisdictions in this subject area.

An examination of the rules contained in the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation, and the types of problems that may arise under its application.

This Law Firm Publication by Herbert Smith outlines the key features of the recent framework document on competition law compliance programmes, published by the French Competition Authority. The notice offers guidance on effective competition compliance programmes for companies operating in France, and aims to ensure implementation of successful programmes across all relevant companies in the territory.  

This Law Firm Publication by Norton Rose focuses on the substantive rules under the Hong Kong Competition Ordinance, expected to enter into force in 2014. The Ordinance introduces two conduct rules which generally prohibit anticompetitive agreements and conduct in the market.

This Law Firm Publication by Jones Day examines new competition legislation in Brazil, which is effective as of 29 May 2012. Although the new legislation was designed to improve the efficiency of the merger review process and bring greater legal certainty to businesses in Brazil, before approving the new law, President Rousseff vetoed several provisions that affect timing of review, settlement procedures and transitional measures, which could potentially alter the original intention of the legislation.

This feature article, the second in a series of articles about the legal aspects of doing business in China, provides a practical overview of the Chinese merger control system.

The EU and US are in the process of setting up a permanent transatlantic merger control working group (the Working Group), which is expected to hold its first meeting at the end of this year. It is important to identify the Working Group's impact on companies and merger control on both sides of the Atlantic.

An analysis of the latest efforts at co-operation by the US and EU antitrust agencies, highlighting what still needs to be done.

A look at the shortcomings of the relationship between the UK and EC competition law.

Representatives of the United States and Canadian governments recently signed a positive comity agreement that enhances the process under which the countries will refer anti-trust/competition cases to each other's law enforcement agencies.

New, updated multi-jurisdictional guides are now available. The multi-jurisdictional guides provide a comprehensive analysis, in question and answer format, of the national competition law regimes (merger control, restrictive practices and dominance) in a number of key jurisdictions, in the EU and beyond. In addition, the new, updated leniency guides provide a comprehensive overview, in question and answer format, of the national leniency programmes that apply in 18 key jurisdictions around the world.

An update on the publication of new, updated multi-jurisdictional guides on competition and leniency and of new articles from the PLC Cross-border Competition Handbook 2010.

The European Commission has prohibited the proposed acquisition of TNT Express by United Parcel Service.

On 9 November 2009, the Heads of the Russian and the US competition authorities signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU). This MoU is the first document on inter-agency co-operation signed between the Russian and the US competition authorities that defines goals, tasks and basic forms of co-operation.

On 26 June 2003, it was announced that the EU and US have agreed to open negotiations for an overall agreement on air transport liberalisation.

The European Commission has announced that certain provisions of the Visa International payment card scheme are compatible with the EU competition rules.

Record fines have been imposed in Canada and the US on vitamin companies involved in price-fixing cartels and market allocation agreements.

The European Commission is proposing to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) that it should establish a stronger international framework for competition rules.