I. The Role of European Competition Law for European Integration
Central issue for this chapter: Role of EU competition law for institution building in the EU and for the general trajectory of European integration.
Subquestions e.g. include: the role of EU competition law for the evolution of the conception of law in the EU; the interaction of competition law and the free movement rules; the role of EU competition law before the ECJ; the growing influence and importance of DG Competition in the Commission; the influence of EU Competition Law for phases of intensified integration/hiccups; its influence for perceptions of the EU in member states and beyond.
LAW: Heike Schweitzer
HIST: Kiran Klaus Patel
II. National traditions of competition policy – their influence on EU competition law and the influence of EU competition law on national competition law thinking
General point: argument of both texts should ideally have both dimensions – influence of national law on EU tier but also vice versa. Clearly, the focus of the historian and the lawyer can diverge.
Subquestions: influence of ordoliberalism on EU competition law; the influence of French administrative law on the enforcement structure and judicial review; specific contribution by Italy / Netherlands / Benelux; sources of diverging influence of respective national legal traditions. And: when did EU competition law start influencing the national competition policies? When did national courts start to apply EU competition rules and cite ECJ judgments? When and why did they adapt their laws to the EU law? Institutional impact beyond the EU, also on legal discourses?
LAW: Adrian Künzler
HIST: Laurent Warzoulet
III. Regulation 17 – drafting history and the role of Reg. 17 for the evolution of EU competition law
Main question: How, when and why was regulation 17 created?
Subquestions e.g. include: backdrop of Treaties; concrete negotiations leading to Regulation 17; role of Commission; role of experts; content and alternatives discussed at the time (in the political and the legal realm); perception of EU lawyers and others of regulation 17 ex post.
LAW: Lorenzo Pace
HIST: Katja Seidel
IV. The evolution of the law on Art. 81 and Art. 82
Main point: Changes in the political and legal practices regarding Art. 81 and 82 over time & their sources.
Subquestions e.g. include: What did the Commission perceive as the main challenges of EU competition law throughout the latter’s 50 years of existence? How did these policy changes translate into legal questions? How has the Commission’s agenda evolved and what have been the driving forces in these changes? What has been the interaction between the Commission and the ECJ over time (Cooperation? Control and delimitation?)?
The authors of this chapter should choose some specific problem areas under Art. 81/82 (e.g.: vertical distribution systems; cartels; tying) in order to illustrate the evolution of the law and the points they intend to make.
LAW: Sebastian Van de Scheur
HIST: Sigfrido Ramirez Perez
V. American influences on EU competition law
Main question: America as role-model, independent parallel case or counterexample?
Subquestions: US initial role and change over time; indirect impact of US via German laws; direct US influences on competition law enforcement? Any impact in the context of the discussions surrounding Reg. 17? Intellectual influences (Mestmaecker – Art. 82 and the parallel application of EU competition rules and national rules); influences of US antitrust in the early academic debates on EU competition law case; Boeing/McDonell-Douglas; the cooperation agreement EU-US; delimitation as a tactical device in transatlantic negotiations? Other reasons for divergence, tensions. AND: what does all this tell us about the general relationship between US and EU (Empire by integration? Europe as Empire? Etc.)
LAW: Mel Marquis
HIST: Brigitte Leucht
VI. Competition policy and industrial policy
Main question: Relationship between the two fields – with delimitations, synergies, parallels and convergences.
Subquestions include: turning points; influence of different national traditions in this regard; who were the actors in the debate?; concrete key examples/case studies.
LAW: Thorsten Käseberg
HIST: Arthe van Laer