Adresáti právní úpravy – jak dalece se koncept soutěžitele promítá do dalších oblastí kompetence soutěžního úřadu?

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15220%2F21%3A73611965" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15220/21:73611965 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://obd.upol.cz/id_publ/333191852" target="_blank" >https://obd.upol.cz/id_publ/333191852</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

čeština

Název v původním jazyce

Adresáti právní úpravy – jak dalece se koncept soutěžitele promítá do dalších oblastí kompetence soutěžního úřadu?

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Působnost Úřadu pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže se netýká jen vlastního soutěžního práva, ale rovněž mimo jiné dozoru nad zneužíváním významné tržní síly, poskytování veřejné podpory a zadávání veřejných zakázek. Zatímco adresáti soutěžního práva jsou označováni za soutěžitele, kterými se myslí ekonomické (nikoliv právní) jednotky, adresáty ostatních oblastí působnosti ÚOHS jsou fyzické a právnické osoby (právní jednotky). Tento článek se zabývá otázkou, jestli tento rozdíl může působit v praxi aplikační obtíže.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Addressees of Regulation - to what extend is the concept of an undertaking reflected in other areas of competence of the competition authority?

Popis výsledku anglicky

Competences of the Czech Competition Authority cover not only the competition law per se (Act on the Protection of Competition), but also supervision over state aid (Act on Certain Relations in the Area of State Aid), public procurement (Public Procurement Act) and retailers with significant market power (Significant Market Power Act). The legislation, governing all these areas, is intertwined and it its complex directed at promoting competition in the market. The aim of this article is to assess to what extend are these acts compatible, as regards the definition of their addressees. The addressees of competition law are undertakings, defined as economic rather than legal units; a single undertaking may thus be composed of numerous legal entities. This is well established in EU competition law but may face misunderstandings on national level; this is documented on the example of Slovakia, where the concept of an undertaking as an economic unit was only endorsed in 2021, and of Slovakia, where it has arguably not been fully implemented yet. In the Czech Republic, the Competition Authority managed, with a substantial help from Czech courts, to push through this this understanding of undertakings relatively early. This conclusion however only applies to public enforcement; as far as private enforcement is concerned, it remains to be seen whether the civil courts will be willing to accept this line of reasoning. Conversely, in the relations governed by the Significant Market Power Act, the addressees were originally perceived as undertakings, i.e. as economic units; the competition authority however decided to disregard this concept and understand the addressees of the act only as legal units. It is argued in the article that such an interpretation causes problems in praxis, the proposed amendment of the Significant Market Power Act however does not address this issue. It is also argued that the current definition of the addressees of this act is inconsistent with the Directive on Unfair Trading Practices in the Food Chain. The problem does seemingly not arise in the area of state aid, which is directly covered by the EU law. The Act on Certain Relations in the Area State Aid, which implements the EU law, defines the beneficiaries of aid as legal units, whereas the EU law perceives them as undertakings; even though we are not aware of any actual problems in practice, it is claimed in the article that it could complicate the recovery of illegally granted aid. Concerning finally the public procurement, both the EU and Czech law defines the bidders as legal units. No problems are admittedly associated with this approach, but for specific cases concerning interaction with competition law, as an infringement of competition may provide a ground for excluding a bidder. The bidder itself may not have been actually involved in the infringement, but the economic group it is part of could. The EU law may arguably be interpreted in a way allowing for bridging these differences, it would however be close to impossible on purely national level without specific provisions of the Public Procurement Act.

Druh

J_ost - Ostatní články v recenzovaných periodicích

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA18-21829S" target="_blank" >GA18-21829S: Koncept soutěžitele v českém a unijním právu</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2021

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

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

Název periodika

Antitrust revue soutěžního práva

ISSN

1804-1183

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

2021

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

4

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

7

Strana od-do

"97 "- 103

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—