Arbitrability of EU competition law-based claims: Where do we stand after the CDC hydrogen peroxide case?

Damien Geradin, Emilio Villano

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

In this article, we discuss the extent to which EU competition rules are arbitrable. There is a wide consensus that Articles 101 and 102 TFEU are fully arbitrable and we share that opinion. More challenging questions may, however, arise when the dispute subject to arbitration raises issues under the other competition provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, i.e. Articles 106 to 108, as well as in secondary EU competition legislation (e.g. the EU Merger Control Regulation). Moreover, in the recent CDC Case, the question has arisen as to whether arbitration is a suitable method to settle claims for damages arising from breaches of competition law made by one of the parties to a contract containing an arbitration clause. We discuss AG Jääskinen’s controversial Opinion, the judgment of the CJEU, and their possible implications on the arbitrability of damages actions based on breaches of EU competition rules.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)67-91
Number of pages25
JournalWorld Competition : Law and Economics Review
Volume40
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

EU
arbitration
Law
damages
merger
treaty
legislation
Arbitration
Competition law
Hydrogen peroxide
regulation
Breach
Damage
Functioning
European Union
Merger control
Treaties
Dispute
Legislation

Cite this

@article{0e120fd7f12c4aee9540c2deec7bdd1b,
title = "Arbitrability of EU competition law-based claims: Where do we stand after the CDC hydrogen peroxide case?",
abstract = "In this article, we discuss the extent to which EU competition rules are arbitrable. There is a wide consensus that Articles 101 and 102 TFEU are fully arbitrable and we share that opinion. More challenging questions may, however, arise when the dispute subject to arbitration raises issues under the other competition provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, i.e. Articles 106 to 108, as well as in secondary EU competition legislation (e.g. the EU Merger Control Regulation). Moreover, in the recent CDC Case, the question has arisen as to whether arbitration is a suitable method to settle claims for damages arising from breaches of competition law made by one of the parties to a contract containing an arbitration clause. We discuss AG J{\"a}{\"a}skinen’s controversial Opinion, the judgment of the CJEU, and their possible implications on the arbitrability of damages actions based on breaches of EU competition rules.",
author = "Damien Geradin and Emilio Villano",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "67--91",
journal = "World Competition : Law and Economics Review",
issn = "1011-4548",
publisher = "Kluwer Law International",
number = "1",

}

Arbitrability of EU competition law-based claims : Where do we stand after the CDC hydrogen peroxide case? / Geradin, Damien; Villano, Emilio.

In: World Competition : Law and Economics Review, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2017, p. 67-91.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Arbitrability of EU competition law-based claims

T2 - Where do we stand after the CDC hydrogen peroxide case?

AU - Geradin, Damien

AU - Villano, Emilio

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - In this article, we discuss the extent to which EU competition rules are arbitrable. There is a wide consensus that Articles 101 and 102 TFEU are fully arbitrable and we share that opinion. More challenging questions may, however, arise when the dispute subject to arbitration raises issues under the other competition provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, i.e. Articles 106 to 108, as well as in secondary EU competition legislation (e.g. the EU Merger Control Regulation). Moreover, in the recent CDC Case, the question has arisen as to whether arbitration is a suitable method to settle claims for damages arising from breaches of competition law made by one of the parties to a contract containing an arbitration clause. We discuss AG Jääskinen’s controversial Opinion, the judgment of the CJEU, and their possible implications on the arbitrability of damages actions based on breaches of EU competition rules.

AB - In this article, we discuss the extent to which EU competition rules are arbitrable. There is a wide consensus that Articles 101 and 102 TFEU are fully arbitrable and we share that opinion. More challenging questions may, however, arise when the dispute subject to arbitration raises issues under the other competition provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, i.e. Articles 106 to 108, as well as in secondary EU competition legislation (e.g. the EU Merger Control Regulation). Moreover, in the recent CDC Case, the question has arisen as to whether arbitration is a suitable method to settle claims for damages arising from breaches of competition law made by one of the parties to a contract containing an arbitration clause. We discuss AG Jääskinen’s controversial Opinion, the judgment of the CJEU, and their possible implications on the arbitrability of damages actions based on breaches of EU competition rules.

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 67

EP - 91

JO - World Competition : Law and Economics Review

JF - World Competition : Law and Economics Review

SN - 1011-4548

IS - 1

ER -