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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper discusses the possible significance of the recent Empagran decision of the US Supreme court for the extraterritorial enforcement of competition law. In this decision the US Supreme rejected the claim of foreign plaintiff suing in the US another foreign firm which had participated in an international cartel but the Court did not rule out that such a claim could be admitted if it was established that the damage abroad was linked to a domestic violation of the Sherman act. We focus on two questions: - Is the Empagran decision merely a reaffirmation of a strict interpretation of the effects doctrine, and , if that is the case, how can the enforcement of domestic competition laws by national competition authorities deal with transnational anticompetitive practices ? - Can the Empagran decision be understood as signalling a move a move away from the pure effects doctrine and the beginning of a new era with a reinforced role for US courts in the fight against international cartels ?

Cartels globaux, riposte américaine. L'ère empagran ?