Cumulative Enforcement of European and National Competition Law and the Ne Bis In Idem Principle Case Comment to the Judgement of EU Court of Justice of 3 April 2019Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S.A. v Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów (Case C-617/17)

The judgement of EU Court of Justice in response to the request for a preliminary ruling by the Polish Supreme Court confirms that the principle of ne bis in idem, enshrined in Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding a national com...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Mario Libertini
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Warsaw 2019-12-01
Series:Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2019_12_20/231.pdf
_version_ 1818483373525434368
author Mario Libertini
author_facet Mario Libertini
author_sort Mario Libertini
collection DOAJ
description The judgement of EU Court of Justice in response to the request for a preliminary ruling by the Polish Supreme Court confirms that the principle of ne bis in idem, enshrined in Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding a national competition authority from fining an undertaking in a single decision for an infringement of national competition law and for an infringement of Article 82 EC (now Article 102 TFEU). In that regard it can be concluded that the judgement does not have anything new and is just a confirmation of settled case-law. Unfortunately, this case represents a lost opportunity to review the ‘double barrier’ doctrine and to clarify if the relationship between European and national competition law is one of ‘bilateral specialty’ or not.
first_indexed 2024-12-10T15:41:19Z
format Article
id doaj.art-707b10f3333445369145fed91bfb9dd0
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1689-9024
2545-0115
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-10T15:41:19Z
publishDate 2019-12-01
publisher University of Warsaw
record_format Article
series Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
spelling doaj.art-707b10f3333445369145fed91bfb9dd02022-12-22T01:43:06ZengUniversity of WarsawYearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies1689-90242545-01152019-12-01122023124310.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2019.12.20.9Cumulative Enforcement of European and National Competition Law and the Ne Bis In Idem Principle Case Comment to the Judgement of EU Court of Justice of 3 April 2019Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S.A. v Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów (Case C-617/17)Mario Libertini0 Law Department of “Sapienza” University of RomeThe judgement of EU Court of Justice in response to the request for a preliminary ruling by the Polish Supreme Court confirms that the principle of ne bis in idem, enshrined in Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding a national competition authority from fining an undertaking in a single decision for an infringement of national competition law and for an infringement of Article 82 EC (now Article 102 TFEU). In that regard it can be concluded that the judgement does not have anything new and is just a confirmation of settled case-law. Unfortunately, this case represents a lost opportunity to review the ‘double barrier’ doctrine and to clarify if the relationship between European and national competition law is one of ‘bilateral specialty’ or not.https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2019_12_20/231.pdfne bis in idem principle; objectives of eu competition lawobjectives of national competition laws
spellingShingle Mario Libertini
Cumulative Enforcement of European and National Competition Law and the Ne Bis In Idem Principle Case Comment to the Judgement of EU Court of Justice of 3 April 2019Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S.A. v Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów (Case C-617/17)
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
ne bis in idem principle; objectives of eu competition law
objectives of national competition laws
title Cumulative Enforcement of European and National Competition Law and the Ne Bis In Idem Principle Case Comment to the Judgement of EU Court of Justice of 3 April 2019Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S.A. v Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów (Case C-617/17)
title_full Cumulative Enforcement of European and National Competition Law and the Ne Bis In Idem Principle Case Comment to the Judgement of EU Court of Justice of 3 April 2019Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S.A. v Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów (Case C-617/17)
title_fullStr Cumulative Enforcement of European and National Competition Law and the Ne Bis In Idem Principle Case Comment to the Judgement of EU Court of Justice of 3 April 2019Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S.A. v Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów (Case C-617/17)
title_full_unstemmed Cumulative Enforcement of European and National Competition Law and the Ne Bis In Idem Principle Case Comment to the Judgement of EU Court of Justice of 3 April 2019Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S.A. v Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów (Case C-617/17)
title_short Cumulative Enforcement of European and National Competition Law and the Ne Bis In Idem Principle Case Comment to the Judgement of EU Court of Justice of 3 April 2019Powszechny Zakład Ubezpieczeń na Życie S.A. v Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów (Case C-617/17)
title_sort cumulative enforcement of european and national competition law and the ne bis in idem principle case comment to the judgement of eu court of justice of 3 april 2019powszechny zaklad ubezpieczen na zycie s a v prezes urzedu ochrony konkurencji i konsumentow case c 617 17
topic ne bis in idem principle; objectives of eu competition law
objectives of national competition laws
url https://www.yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/yars2019_12_20/231.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT mariolibertini cumulativeenforcementofeuropeanandnationalcompetitionlawandthenebisinidemprinciplecasecommenttothejudgementofeucourtofjusticeof3april2019powszechnyzakładubezpieczennazyciesavprezesurzeduochronykonkurencjiikonsumentowcasec61717