The Antitrust Hotch Potch

Doctoral Damage

To all our Phd readers. In Case 3/00, Mr. Pitsiorlas was trying to collect damages from the EC Institutions. He claimed that "the refusal of the two Community ‘institutions’ to grant him access to the document requested had disrupted his timetable for writing his thesis and was still preventing him – three years and four months after the expiry of the deadline set for handing in his thesis (31 March 2001) – from finishing it and submitting it to the Thessaloniki Faculty of Law".

Now comes the best part. The applicant sought to explain with accuracy the damage suffered from the institutions' refusal to disclose the document:

"The applicant claims, second, that the delay of approximately three and a half years in finishing his thesis caused him very serious non‑material damage consisting in:

–        a significant prolongation of his anxieties concerning the completion of his thesis;

–        the delay to his career and financial advancement;

–        the impossibility of applying for job opportunities in Greece and, in particular, abroad, for which a doctorate was necessary;

–        the postponement of a career in an academic environment which requires a doctorate, the resulting uncertainty and the worsening of his situation, in view also of his age;

–        the need to update his thesis repeatedly as a result of constant developments in the EMU and the resulting loss of time and fatigue;

–        the psychological pressure suffered to this day concerning the completion of his thesis, the negative and ironic comments made about him and which continue to be made, and the obligation to have to give an explanation every time he is asked when his thesis will be completed;

–        the loss of time and energy brought about by the proceedings before the Court of First Instance and the Court of Justice;

–        the psychological strain caused by the length of the proceedings, the outcome of which is fundamental for his future.

The applicant claims that, in those circumstances, he should be awarded the sum of EUR 90 000 (!) by way of compensation for the non‑material damage which he has suffered".

The CFI - rightly - dismissed the action. I stressed, in bold, bits which will make sense to anyone who has gone through a doctoral dissertation.

Nicolas

Conference on liability in damages for breach of EC (competition) law

On 22 February 2008, the United Kingdom Association of European Law jointly with Centre for European Law & Integration is holding a one-day conference on non-contractual liability in damages of the Member States and the Community. As far as we, antitrust lawyers are concerned, the conference will deal with issues such as Commission's liability for illegal decisions and private parties liability for breach of EC competition rules. Speakers include prominent EC competititon specialists (D. Bailey, N. Green, P. Lasok, etc.).

Programme and registration form can be downloaded hereafter:

Download damagesbar_2.doc

Nicolas

PS: I am aware - and I apologize - that this blog has lately been turning to a conference announcement website.

Last call - GCLC Lunch Talk on Friday

We still have a number of seats available for the next lunch talk of the GCLC, which will take place on Friday.  (with JF. Bellis, J. Davies, S. Kinsella, J. Ratliff and A. Winckler). Tickets will be allocated on a first come-first served basis.

Registration form can be downloaded below.
Download 30th_lunch_talk_of_the_gclc_registration_form.pdf

Conference on the MSFT Ruling

On 16 May 2008, The Institute of European Law at Birmingham Law School is organizing a conference on the Microsoft case and its implications for the IT industry and EC competition law. Speakers include I. Forrester, J. Flynn, S. Anderman and D. Rydiard.

See here for the programme.

Nicolas

Madrid - Specialized study programme in competition law

Luis Ortiz Blanco invited me to give a lecture, early this week, in Madrid (the topic: "agreements, concerted practices and decisions by associations of undertakings" ). The lecture took place in the context of a high-profile study programme, run by the Instituto de Estudios Bursatiles (a business school affiliated to the Universidad Complutense). The course intends to provide an in-depth training in competition law to Spanish competition officials and lawyers. It consists on the one hand of lectures and, on the other hand, of practical sessions where students are asked to solve complex cases involving EC and Spanish competition law issues. Needless to say, the study programme has been placed in good hands: Besides Luis Ortiz, who does not need further introduction, Pablo Ibanez, from the European University Institute in Florence and Alfonso Lamadrid, from the law firm Garrigues, are taking care of the organization of the courses. In addition, most of the top notch Madrid practictioners have been invited to give lectures.

I come back from Madrid with much inspiration for the LLM in competition and IP law in Liege. Please find below links to the brochure of the study programme and to my presentation.

Download triptico_curso_de_derecho.pdf

Download agreements_decisions_of_associations_of_undertakings_and_concerted_practices_xi_curso_de_derecho_de_la_competencia_ieb.ppt

Nicolas

30th Lunch Talk of the GCLC - 2007 in retrospect and predictions for 2008

The next lunch talk of the GCLC will take place on 25 January. JF. Bellis, J. Davies, S. Kinsella, J. ratliff and A. Winckler will come back on 2007 (and, possibly, formulate ex ante predictions for 2008). Registration form can be downloaded below.

Nicolas

Download 30th_lunch_talk_of_the_gclc_registration_form.pdf

Conference in Utrecht, 22-23 May: "Judicial Review in Competition Law and Economic Regulation"

On 22 and 23 May 2008, the Europa Institute  of the Utrecht University School of Law (Netherlands) will hold a conference entitled "Judicial Review in Competition Law and Economic Regulation". The substantive reforms achieved during the last decade and, in particular, the unprecedented reliance of competition authorities and NRAs on industrial economics, emphasizes the need for appropriate judicial review mechanisms (Scherer once wrote “the trouble is economic analysis is an elastic instrument, and I am sorry to report, some economists’ consciences are also elastic”). However, placing agencies under permanent judicial scrutiny bears the risk of hindering the efficiency of economic regulation. Hence, the challenge of striking the right balance between efficient judicial review and efficient economic regulation.

The conference organizers have chosen to deal with the issue under a comparative standpoint. The programme and registration form can be downloaded hereafter.

Download flyerconferencejudicialreviewEuropaInstituteUtrecht.doc

Nicolas