English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article examines a judgment of the Supreme Court of Hungary (the Curia), in which the Curia called upon in connection with the effect on trade between Member States its holding that competition authorities – compared to other administrative authorities – are required to establish a higher standard of proof in order to draw a reasonable conclusion as to the existence of an infringement. It ruled that this would be in order to draw a reasonable conclusion as to the existence of an infringement. This requirement comes from the quasi-criminal nature of competition proceedings. In this declaration, from the context of the effect on trade between Member States, the Curia equated the applicable standard of proof to substantial competition law infringements with the criterion of applicable law, which only determines appropriate applications of EU competition law. In this article, we present the relevant parts of this case before scrutinising the related literature, legislation and case law. After presenting the case, we analyse the effects on trade between Member States, as well as the role of the market definition in establishing inter-state trade. Then, we turn our attention to questions related to proof and evidence in competition law, both in the context of substantial infringements of law and of the effects on trade between Member States. The Ziegler case points to the direction that these two cannot be equated. In the end, we sketch out the consequences arising from the Curia’s judgment.  Keywords: effect on trade between Member States; NAAT-rule; market definition; applicable law; standard of proof; case law

Effect on Trade Between Member States: What Is the Standard of Proof to Establish Grounds for Applying EU Law?