Breaking the Habits: The German Competition Law after the 7th Amendment to the Act against Restraints of Competition (GWB)

German Law Journal

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 399-419

  Klees, Andreas M ^a  

^a LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 69249195015     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20718322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S2071832200004740     Document Type: Article

References (100)

1. Siebtes Gesetz zur Änderung des Gesetzes gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen, Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt, BGBl.) 2005, Part. I, 1954 -1969
2. Gesetz zur Beschleunigung der Umsetzung von Öffentlich-Privaten Partnerschaften und zur Verbesserung gesetzlicher Rahmenbedingungen für Öffentlich-Private Partnerschaften, BGBl. 2005, Part I, 2676-2681. A non-official English version of the GWB is available at: http://www.bundeskartellamt.de/wEnglisch/CompetitionAct/CompAct.shtml.
3. Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on The Implementation of the Rules on the Competition Laid Down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty, 2003 O.J. (L 1/1) [Regulation No. 1].
4. Felix Müller, The New Council Regulation (EC) No. 1/2003 on the Implementation of the Rules on Competition, 5 GERMAN LAW JOURNAL 722 (2004).
5. INGO SCHMIDT, WETTBEWERBSPOLITIK UND KARTELLRECHT (7th ed., 2001) surveys the six amendments between 1958 to 1998.
6. Wolfgang Wurmnest, A New Era for Private Antitrust Litigation in Germany? A Critical Appraisal of the Modernized Law against Restraints of Competition, 6 GERMAN LAW JOURNAL 1174 (2005).
7. These are according to sec. 48 para. 1 GWB the Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) and the highest administrative authorities of the states within the Federal Republic of Germany (oberste Landesbehörden).
8. According to sec. 50 para. 1 GWB these authorities have jurisdiction over the application of Art. 81 and 82 EC Treaty (see also Art. 35 (1) Regulation No. 1).
9. HERMANN-JOSEF BUNTE, KARTELLRECHT 142 (2003).
10. Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2790/1999 on the application of Article 81 (3) of the Treaty to Categories of Vertical Agreements and Concerted Practices, 1999 O.J. (L 336) 21.
11. Drucksachen des Bundesrates (BR-Drs.) No. 441/04, 40.
12. See sec. 23 of the draft of the 7th Amendment, BR-Drs. No. 210/05, 1, 9;
13. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 1, 53.
14. Drucksachen des Deutschen Bundestages (BT-Drs.) 15/5430.
15. KNUT-WERNER LANGE, EUROPÄISCHES UND DEUTSCHES KARTELLRECHT 58 (2006).
16. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 39.
17. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 41.
18. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 76;
19. TOBIAS LETTL, KARTELLRECHT 219 (2005).
20. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 77.
21. LANGE, supra note 12, at 58.
22. Harald Kahlenberg & Christian Haellmigk, Neues Deutsches Kartellgesetz, 60 BETRIEBSBERATER [BB] 1509, 1510 (2005).
23. ANDREAS KLEES, EUROPÄISCHES KARTELLVERFAHRENSRECHT 57 (2005).
24. See the Statement by the German Delegation on Article 2 of the Regulation No. 1, 25 November 2002, available at: http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/Inhalte/Pdf/Wettbewerbspolitik/protokollerklaerungbundesreg- kvo, property=pdf, bereich=bmwi, sprache=de, rwb=true.pdf;
25. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 39, 76.
26. See e.g. the Commission Notice Guidelines on Vertical Restraints, 2000 O.J. (C 291) 01.
27. 2004 O.J (L 123) 11.
28. See Ulrich Ehricke & Holger Blask, Dynamischer Verweis auf Gruppenfreistellungsverordnungen im neuen GWB?, 58 JURISTENZEITUNG [JZ] 722 (2003).
29. Regulation No 26 applying certain rules of competition to production of and trade in agricultural products, 1962 O.J. 993.
30. See Rainer Bechtold & Martin Buntscheck, Die 7. GWB-Novelle und die Entwicklung des deutschen Kartellrechts, 58 NEUE JURISTISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT [NJW] 2966 (2005).
31. See KLEES supra note 20, at 73.
32. See Rainer Bechtold & Ingo Brinker & Wolfgang Bosch & Simon Hirsbrunner, EG-Kartellrecht Art. 3 VO 1/2003 no 21 (2005);
33. ERNST-JOACHIM MESTMÄCKER & HEIKE SCHWEITZER, EUROPÄISCHES WETTBEWERBSRECHT 149 (2nd ed. 2004).
34. BR-Drs. No. 441/04 33 This has already been certain - at least in the question of whether a merger creates or reinforces a dominant position on the market - since the judgment of the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice - BGH) in the case "Staubsaugermarkt" in 2004, 57 NJW 3711 (2004). The BGH abandoned in this judgment his former opinion whereas the relevant market had been limited to the scope of the GWB.
35. LANGE, supra note 12, at 105.
36. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 78.
37. BT-Drs. No. 15/3640, 73.
38. Critical Florian Wagner-von Papp, Empfiehlt sich das Empfehlungsverbot? 55 WIRTSCHAFT UND WETTBEWERB [WuW] 379 (2005).
39. Kahlenberg & Haellmigk, supra note 18, at 1511.
40. KLEES, supra note 20, at 12.
41. KLEES, supra note 20, at 25.
42. See the Commission Notice on cooperation within the Network of Competition Authorities 2004 O.J. (C 101) 43.
43. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 76.
44. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 89.
45. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 89.
46. See BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 57 and recital (13) of Regulation No. 1 within the scope of Article 9 Regulation No. 1.
47. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 90.
48. KLEES, supra note 20, at 177.
49. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 90.
50. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 57.
51. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 57.
52. Kahlenberg & Haellmigk, supra note 18, at 1510;
53. LANGE, supra note 12, at 71.
54. BR-Drs. No. 497/05, 4.
55. Before, the national competition authorities had such competence limited to vertical restraints, see KLEES, supra note 20, at 59.
56. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 90.
57. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 58.
58. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 91.
59. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 91.
60. WETTBEWERB IN RECHT UND PRAXIS [WRP] 1248 (2003).
61. Case 68/88, Commission v. Greece, 1989 E.C.R. 2965, paras. 23-25.
62. Commission Notice on cooperation within the Network of Competition Authorities 2004 O.J. (C 101) 43, 44.
63. Wolfgang Deselears, Uferlose Geldbußen bei Kartellverstößen nach der neuen 10% Umsatzregel des sec. 81 Abs. 4 GWB? 56 WIRTSCHAFT UND WETTBEWERB (WuW) 118 (2006);
64. Bechtold & Buntscheck, supra note 28, at 2970.
65. According to sec. 81 para. 7 GWB, the Bundeskartellamt is currently working on guidelines on the method of setting fines.
66. BT-Drs. No. 15/5049, 50.
67. BT-Drs. No. 15/5049, 50.
68. That limit seeks to ensure that the fines are not excessive or disproportionate, see Judgment of the Court, 28 June 2005, joined cases C-189/02 P, C-202/02 P, C-205/02 P to C-208/02 P and C-213/02 P
69. RICHARD WISH, COMPETITION LAW 267 (5th ed., 2003).
70. See Deselaers, supra note 62, at 118.
71. See 54 NJW 1779 (2002).
72. This exception, however, seems to be obsolete due to the precedence of the Energiewirtschaftsgesetz (sec. 111 EnWG) BGBl. 2005, Part. I, 1970 (3621);
73. Kahlenberg & Haellmigk, supra note 18, at 1513.
74. Recital (15) and Art. 11 (1) Regulation No. 1.
75. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 109.
76. BR-Drs. No. 441/04, 109.
77. Case T-353/94, Postbank v. Commission, 1996 E.C.R. II-921, paras. 86 and 87;
78. case 145/83, Adams v. Commission, 1985 E.C.R. 3539, para. 34.
79. See Commission Notice on the cooperation between the Commission and the courts of the EU Member States in the application of Articles 81 and 82 EC, O.J. 2004 (C 101) 54, para. 25.
80. Case C-453/99, Courage and Crehan 2001 E.C.R. I-6297.
81. COM (2005) 672 final (19 December 2005).
82. See Wurmnest, supra note 4, at 1180.
83. Available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/antitrust/others/actions_for_damages/study.html.
84. Green Paper "Damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules" note 76, para. 1.3 See Daniel Zimmer, Significant Impediment to Effective Competition, 2 ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR WETTBEWERBSRECHT [ZWeR] 250 (2004);
85. Lars Hendrik Röller& Andreas Strohm, Ökonomische Analyse des Begriffs "significant impediment to effective competition", available at GD Competitions website.
86. Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 On the Control of Concentrations Between Undertakings (the EC Merger Regulation) 2004 O.J. (L 24) 1.
87. Ulf Böge, Reform der europäischen Fusionskontrolle, 54 WUW 138 (2004).
88. See Röller & Strohm, supra note 80.
89. See the preliminary assessment of the Chief Competition Economist Lars-Hendrik Röller, The Impact of the New Substantive Test in European Merger Control, 22 January 2006, available at: http://europe.eu.int/comm/dgs/competition/new_substantive_test.pdf
90. BT-Drs. No.15/5049, 50.
91. Bechtold & Buntscheck, supra note 28, at 2970.
92. B 8 - 113/03 - 1, 13 January 2006, available at: http://www.bundeskartellamt.de/wDeutsch/download/pdf/Kartell/Kartell06/B8-113-03.pdf.
93. B 6 - 92202 - Fa - 103/05, 19 January 2006, available at: http://www.bundeskartellamt.de/wDeutsch/download/pdf/Fusion/Fusion06/B6-103-05.pdf.
94. Financial Times Deutschland, 1 February 2006.
95. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung [FAZ], 24 February 2006.
96. Critical on this the Chairman of the Monopoly Commission (Monopolkommission), Jürgen Basedow, FAZ, 4 March 2006 and the President of the Bundeskartellamt, Ulf Böge, FAZ, 8 February 2006.
97. BT-Drs. No. 16/365.
98. BT-Drs. No. 16/236.
99. Available at: http://www.bundesregierung.de/Anlage920135/Koalitionsvertrag.pdf, (page 112).
100. See Commission Notice on cooperation within the Network of Competition Authorities, 2004 O.J. (C 101) 43, 49.