Prospects for Concurrent Private Enforcement of the DMA and Article 102 TFEU

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11220%2F24%3A10488300" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11220/24:10488300 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=.TzxkCI5Hp" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=.TzxkCI5Hp</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnae014" target="_blank" >10.1093/jaenfo/jnae014</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Prospects for Concurrent Private Enforcement of the DMA and Article 102 TFEU

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The DMA brings significant changes to the regulation of digital giants. Its enforcement is administratively centralized at the level of the Commission but is also to be carried out through private lawsuits by affected third parties. However, the DMA itself does not establish many rules that would support such private enforcement. There is a possibility, for tactical or strategic reasons, to simultaneously invoke violations of the DMA and Article 102 TFEU in a private lawsuit to achieve the advantages set out in the EU Directive on Damage Compensation. However, this approach may introduce undesirable complications. Additionally, insufficient harmonization of enforcement rules related to the DMA could lead to so-called forum shopping. Therefore, it seems appropriate to consider the introduction of similar mechanisms that strengthen private disputes based on the DMA, akin to those available under the EU Directive on Damage Compensation. The German approach could serve as a worthy example in this regard.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Prospects for Concurrent Private Enforcement of the DMA and Article 102 TFEU

Popis výsledku anglicky

The DMA brings significant changes to the regulation of digital giants. Its enforcement is administratively centralized at the level of the Commission but is also to be carried out through private lawsuits by affected third parties. However, the DMA itself does not establish many rules that would support such private enforcement. There is a possibility, for tactical or strategic reasons, to simultaneously invoke violations of the DMA and Article 102 TFEU in a private lawsuit to achieve the advantages set out in the EU Directive on Damage Compensation. However, this approach may introduce undesirable complications. Additionally, insufficient harmonization of enforcement rules related to the DMA could lead to so-called forum shopping. Therefore, it seems appropriate to consider the introduction of similar mechanisms that strengthen private disputes based on the DMA, akin to those available under the EU Directive on Damage Compensation. The German approach could serve as a worthy example in this regard.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2024

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of Antitrust Enforcement

ISSN

2050-0696

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

2024

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

12

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

6

Strana od-do

241-246

Kód UT WoS článku

001196915500001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85198527224