The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK

Zlatina Georgieva

    Research output: Working paperDiscussion paperOther research output

    Abstract

    The goal of the current work is to delineate national judicial responses to Commission-issued competition soft law within two EU jurisdictions – the UK and the Netherlands. For this purpose, a comparative methodology is adopted and – in terms of theory – several hypotheses of possible judicial attitudes coined in a previous work are brought together under the term national ‘judicial recognition’ of supranational competition soft law. The term ‘recognition’ was chosen, because it has a positive connotation, which signals the author’s discord with the predominant doctrinal scholarly view that soft law should be seen as a danger to democratic rule of law principles and thus become (solely) an object of judicial resistance. It is argued that, to the contrary, competition soft law could and should become ‘positively recognized’ by courts of law since that would enhance enforcement consistency and the concomitant legal certainty and uniform application – the normative starting points for this study. The empirical picture that transpires, however, shows a landscape different from the desired one.
    Original languageEnglish
    Place of PublicationTILEC Discussion Paper Series
    PublisherTILEC
    Pages1-32
    Number of pages32
    Publication statusPublished - 24 Dec 2015

    Publication series

    NameTILEC Discussion Paper Series
    PublisherTILEC

    Fingerprint

    Netherlands
    Law
    constitutional state
    jurisdiction
    EU
    methodology

    Keywords

    • soft law, EU competition law, antitrust, guideline, notice, communication, national court, national judiciary, case law

    Cite this

    Georgieva, Z. (2015). The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK. (pp. 1-32). (TILEC Discussion Paper Series). TILEC Discussion Paper Series: TILEC.
    Georgieva, Zlatina. / The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK. TILEC Discussion Paper Series : TILEC, 2015. pp. 1-32 (TILEC Discussion Paper Series).
    @techreport{15cb5cfe7d714242ba9a9e495b1109b9,
    title = "The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK",
    abstract = "The goal of the current work is to delineate national judicial responses to Commission-issued competition soft law within two EU jurisdictions – the UK and the Netherlands. For this purpose, a comparative methodology is adopted and – in terms of theory – several hypotheses of possible judicial attitudes coined in a previous work are brought together under the term national ‘judicial recognition’ of supranational competition soft law. The term ‘recognition’ was chosen, because it has a positive connotation, which signals the author’s discord with the predominant doctrinal scholarly view that soft law should be seen as a danger to democratic rule of law principles and thus become (solely) an object of judicial resistance. It is argued that, to the contrary, competition soft law could and should become ‘positively recognized’ by courts of law since that would enhance enforcement consistency and the concomitant legal certainty and uniform application – the normative starting points for this study. The empirical picture that transpires, however, shows a landscape different from the desired one.",
    keywords = "soft law, EU competition law, antitrust, guideline, notice, communication, national court, national judiciary, case law",
    author = "Zlatina Georgieva",
    year = "2015",
    month = "12",
    day = "24",
    language = "English",
    series = "TILEC Discussion Paper Series",
    publisher = "TILEC",
    pages = "1--32",
    type = "WorkingPaper",
    institution = "TILEC",

    }

    Georgieva, Z 2015 'The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK' TILEC Discussion Paper Series, TILEC, TILEC Discussion Paper Series, pp. 1-32.

    The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK. / Georgieva, Zlatina.

    TILEC Discussion Paper Series : TILEC, 2015. p. 1-32 (TILEC Discussion Paper Series).

    Research output: Working paperDiscussion paperOther research output

    TY - UNPB

    T1 - The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK

    AU - Georgieva, Zlatina

    PY - 2015/12/24

    Y1 - 2015/12/24

    N2 - The goal of the current work is to delineate national judicial responses to Commission-issued competition soft law within two EU jurisdictions – the UK and the Netherlands. For this purpose, a comparative methodology is adopted and – in terms of theory – several hypotheses of possible judicial attitudes coined in a previous work are brought together under the term national ‘judicial recognition’ of supranational competition soft law. The term ‘recognition’ was chosen, because it has a positive connotation, which signals the author’s discord with the predominant doctrinal scholarly view that soft law should be seen as a danger to democratic rule of law principles and thus become (solely) an object of judicial resistance. It is argued that, to the contrary, competition soft law could and should become ‘positively recognized’ by courts of law since that would enhance enforcement consistency and the concomitant legal certainty and uniform application – the normative starting points for this study. The empirical picture that transpires, however, shows a landscape different from the desired one.

    AB - The goal of the current work is to delineate national judicial responses to Commission-issued competition soft law within two EU jurisdictions – the UK and the Netherlands. For this purpose, a comparative methodology is adopted and – in terms of theory – several hypotheses of possible judicial attitudes coined in a previous work are brought together under the term national ‘judicial recognition’ of supranational competition soft law. The term ‘recognition’ was chosen, because it has a positive connotation, which signals the author’s discord with the predominant doctrinal scholarly view that soft law should be seen as a danger to democratic rule of law principles and thus become (solely) an object of judicial resistance. It is argued that, to the contrary, competition soft law could and should become ‘positively recognized’ by courts of law since that would enhance enforcement consistency and the concomitant legal certainty and uniform application – the normative starting points for this study. The empirical picture that transpires, however, shows a landscape different from the desired one.

    KW - soft law, EU competition law, antitrust, guideline, notice, communication, national court, national judiciary, case law

    M3 - Discussion paper

    T3 - TILEC Discussion Paper Series

    SP - 1

    EP - 32

    BT - The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK

    PB - TILEC

    CY - TILEC Discussion Paper Series

    ER -

    Georgieva Z. The judicial reception of competition soft law in the Netherlands and the UK. TILEC Discussion Paper Series: TILEC. 2015 Dec 24, p. 1-32. (TILEC Discussion Paper Series).