Open AccessThe Gazprom Case: Lessons of the Past For the Future
Author(s) -
Dalia Višinskienė,
Justisutavičienė
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
yearbook of antitrust and regulatory studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2545-0115
pISSN - 1689-9024
DOI - 10.7172/1689-9024.yars.2017.10.16.3
Subject(s) - competition (biology) , commission , discretion , scope (computer science) , competition law , business , jurisprudence , european union , merger control , relevant market , european commission , law and economics , law , international trade , political science , economics , market economy , finance , ecology , monopoly , computer science , biology , programming language
Under the EU Merger Regulation, if the Commission has concerns that a merger may significantly affect competition in the European Union, the merging companies may propose modifications to the project that would guarantee continued competition on the market. The Commission may declare a concentration compatible with the common market following such a modification by the parties and attach to its decision conditions and obligations intended to ensure that the undertakings comply with the commitments. In other words, commitments have to be offered by the parties but the Commission may introduce conditions and obligations if they are required to ensure the enforceability of commitments. Meanwhile the scope to propose merger modifications and the level of discretion of the competition authority are quite different under the Law on Competition of the Republic of Lithuania, adopted almost two decades ago. The goal of this paper is to reveal those differences and, with the help of the jurisprudence of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania in the Gazprom case, to explain how this may impact future cases