EU Law Enforcement – Central point of information, research and discussion

[REPOST] How to Define Relevant Labour Markets?*

The application of competition rules to the conduct and concentrations of employers has been called ‘the new frontier for competition policy’ (see here). This so-called ‘labour antitrust’ has been growing rapidly especially on the other side of the Atlantic over the last fifteen years (see here). ‘All eyes are on labor’ in the United States even in 2024 (see here).

Competition between employers is receiving an increasing attention also on the old continent. We have seen enforcement cases in various European countries (see here). The European Commission reported this summer that it started its first ever formal investigation into no-poach agreements. Earlier this year, the Commission also published a policy brief called Antitrust in Labour Markets.

Yet, markets on which undertakings compete for labour are completely absent from the revised Market Definition Notice (Notice), which the Commission published this year. This is a pity because including labour markets would have given more credibility to the Commission’s mission to intervene in these markets and it would also have provided guidance to other enforcers of EU competition law. My newest working paper reflects on the omission and discusses how to define relevant labour markets.

From tough to tender? A new change in enforcement regime of the Dutch social security system

This blog post is based on the book Van hard naar hart? Handhavers over de menselijke maat in de Participatiewet. This research is funded by the Gratama stichting.

Google AdTech – Break Up or Break Out?

Over the past decade, no firm has faced more scrutiny for violating competition laws than Google. The avalanche of cases against the firm—over 100 around the world—is almost unprecedented. In that light, the question facing competition authorities is increasingly not whether Google has broken the law, but rather what to do about it.

Predictive Justice and the AI Act: the reuse of sensitive data for bias mitigation

European policies and legal instruments are increasingly drawn to a technocentric approach regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI) fairness – that is, they pay a lot of attention to the technical issues of AI, such as ensuring that datasets are balanced and free from errors. With this blog post, I argue that it is not sufficient to focus solely on the technical aspects of fairness without also considering the social, political, and economic systems that shape AI’s development and deployment. Instead, a broader socio-technical approach should be considered. This post is based on my recent publication “Predictive justice in light of the new AI Act proposal”.

Ecosystem theories of harm: application and enforcement (by Manu Batra, Paul de Bijl and Timo Klein)

Ecosystems

The 2023 Booking/eTraveli merger prohibition by the European Commission (EC) was the first EC merger prohibition concerning digital platforms. Booking offered primarily a hotel online travel agency (OTA), amongst other smaller offerings in flights and car rentals, while eTraveli offered a flight OTA. The concept of an ‘ecosystem’ that was used in the Commission’s theory of harm was unique. Though the concept of an ecosystem has been used in other cases, also outside of merger control, the term still lacks an accepted universal definition. Also unclear is the extent to which such a theory of harm differs from conventional theories of harm, what the standards for evidence under this theory of harm are, and how such theories of harm would affect enforcement.

In this context, we recently published an article defining ecosystems, and potential theories of harm concerning ecosystems. In this blog post we investigate how these theories might change the enforcement of merger control.

100th Blog Post on EU Law Enforcement: pertinent questions that deserve our future research and societal attention. Call for Blog Posts (by Kelly Blount, Zlatina Georgieva and Miroslava Scholten)

Today, our blog celebrates its 100^th blog post. Since September 2016, we issue at least one blog post per month, always on the last day of the month. The blog is open to anyone wanting to contribute, also in a different language than English. Our aim is to create a central point for information, research and discussion on the pertinent issues related to the so far understudied theme of the enforcement of EU law. Until now, we have had blog posts, which would announce a new book, idea or project, discuss a recent court judgement or legislative proposal or act, give a comment on a publication or summary of a recent event, to name but a few of our topics. The form of the blog post is thus flexible and inclusive.

This special blog post presents a discussion on some of the pertinent questions that the editing team sees as important in their respective research fields and warrants our further attention and investigation. This post is thus also a call for future blog posts and other initiatives, which could support and enhance the main theme of the blog – ultimately, to aid legislative and enforcement practices (in the EU as well as other jurisdictions) and to promote beneficial policies for society. Ideas for blog posts and full texts could be sent directly to the editors, whose contact details are to be found in the right pane on this website.

But first of all, why blogging?

Continue reading “100th Blog Post on EU Law Enforcement: pertinent questions that deserve our future research and societal attention. Call for Blog Posts (by Kelly Blount, Zlatina Georgieva and Miroslava Scholten)”

Edward Elgar Research Handbook on the Enforcement of EU Law

The EU body of law counts more than 100,000 pieces of legislation and some argue that the legislative activity of the EU has been declining. However, are these laws being followed and do they bring the expected results? To answer these questions, it is important to investigate relevant implementation processes.

Enforcement is a process of monitoring compliance with laws, investigating possible violations and responding to the proven violations via corrections and sanctions. Upon an invitation from Edward Elgar publishing, I have organised a research handbook on the enforcement of EU law, which was written by 50 experts from relevant fields. This blog post gives a succinct overview of the main findings of this book, which has aimed to present the state-of-the-art in research and practice and outline directions for future research and policy. The book shows an evolution of the concept of enforcement of EU law and observes interesting trends. Based on a comparative methodology, it argues for an increasing importance of the preventive function of enforcement and shows an insightful variety of approaches that can be taken in this regard. Finally, the book discusses the question of success of enforcement by pinpointing the factors that could promote or hinder it.

The evolution of EU portability law and its drawbacks

With the prominent role of digital platforms nowadays, switching has become a habit common to many users. A provider can come out of fashion very easily, as users migrate from one service to another in constant search for the best digital service and following the trend. Also “network effects” contributed to the wide spreading of the phenomenon. Against this backdrop, the concept of “portability” has first been articulated as a user right in Article 20 GDPR. This blogpost will portray the different roles acquired by the concept of “portability” throughout the years and spot its intricate relationship with digital platform law and regulation.

Mitigating Antitrust Risks in Due Diligence between Competitors

In the realm of mergers & acquisitions (“M&A”) transactions, corporations almost always undergo due diligence, wherein the buyer conducts a thorough investigation and evaluation of the target company before entering into a transaction. In the context of due diligence operations, antitrust challenges may arise in specific situations, such as when the involved parties are direct competitors. The purpose of this post is to illustrate the instances when antitrust risks emerge during due diligence concerning M&A operations between competitors and to propose suggestions mitigating these risks.

Do crises affect enforcement of EU Law?

In 2018, EU Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker stated that the EU “had been sleepwalking from one crisis to another without waking up.” These crises have no doubt had a range of detrimental effects on the EU, and I argue that crises make it harder for the Commission to enforce EU law. Why? Crises require resources, including time. Time is a fixed and finite resource, and if the Commission is spending time on a crisis, there is less time for enforcement. However, crises do not inevitably lead to lax enforcement. Other actors, including the European Parliament and EU citizens can help overcome the constraints of time.