The Term of Undertaking in Georgian Competition Law
Keywords:
Keywords: Competition, Competition Law, Undertaking, Single Economic Entity Doctrine.Abstract
Through the Association Agreement with EU, Georgia has committed to creating comprehensive competition legislation, that, in turn, gave rise to the need to approximate Georgian national competition law to the European one. In the process of approximation thorough analysis of respective case law established at EU and its member states' level is of great significance. Sharing the achievements of European legal science plays an important role as well. Precisely this is the preceding article's principal objective, which serves to discuss the term of undertaking as one of the most substantial concepts of competition law. Moreover, the paper makes a distinction between institutional and functional approaches to the undertaking based on European experience. It focuses on the relative nature of the notion as well. Finally, the research examines one of the most significant theories acknowledged in the European competition law, known as the "Single Economic Entity Doctrine."
References
Georgian Law on Competition, 6148-Iს, 08/05/2012.
The decision of Competition Agency of Georgia, №04/166, 06/07/2018, 17.
Faul J., Nikpay A., the EU Law of Competition, 3rd ed., 2014, §§ 3.28, 3.59.
Montana L. Jellis J., The concept of undertaking in EC competition law and its application to public bodies: Can you buy your way into article 82, Competition Law Journal, Vol. 2, 2003, 118.
Zimmer D., Immenga/Metsmäcker GWB Kommentar, 3. Auflage, München 2001, § 1, Rn. 24, 30-31.
Zukakishvili K., Japaridze L. (eds.), Kobadze N., Zhvania N., Gvelesiani Z., Akolashvili M., Sergia N., Momtselidze S., Georgian Competition Law, Tbilisi, 2019, 180.
Füller T. J., Kölner Kommentar zum Kartelrecht, Bd. 3. 2016. § 101. Rn. 11, 13-14.
Säcker/Hermann., Münchener Kommentar zum Kartelrecht, Einl. Rn. 946.
Advocate General Leger, Opinion, July 10, 2001, ECLI:EU:C:2001:390, 46.
ECLI:EU:C:1962:30, Klöckner-Werke AG, Joined cases 17/61 and 20/61, § 16.
ECLI:EU:C:1972:70, Chemical Industries, Case 48-69, §§ 132, 133.
ECLI:EU:C:1972:73, Geigy AG, Case 52-69, § 44.
ECLI:EU:C:1973:22, Europemballage and Continental Can, Case 6/72, § 15.
ECLI:EU:C:1974:114, Centrafarm BV, Case 15-74, § 41.
ECLI:EU:C:1984:271, Hydrotherm, Case 170/83, § 11.
ECLI:EU:C:1987:283, Commission v Italy, Case C-118/85 § 7.
ECLI:EU:C:1991:161, Klaus Höfner, Case C-41/90, § 21.
ECLI:EU:C:1993:63, Poucet, Joined Cases C-159/91 and C-160/91 § 17.
ECLI:EU:C:1994:7, SAT Fluggesellschaft, Case C-364/92 §§ 18, 30.
ECLI:EU:C:1995:392, Fédération Française, Case C-244/94.
ECLI:EU:C:1996:405, Viho Europe BV, Case C-73/95 P, § 16.
ECLI:EU:C:1997:603, Job Centre, Case C-55/96 § 21.
ECLI:EU:C:1998:303, Commission v Italy, Case C-35/96, §§ 36, 37.
ECLI:EU:C:2000:428, Pavlov, Joined Cases C-180/98 to C-184/98 §§ 74, 75, 76.
ECLI:EU:C:2002:98, Wouters, Case C-309/99 § 47.
ECLI:EU:T:2005:322, DaimlerChrysler AG, Case T-325/01 § 85.
ECLI:EU:C:2006:784, Confederación Española, Case C 217/05 § 40.
ECLI:EU:C:2009:536, Akzo Nobel NV, Case C-97/08 P. §§ 55, 58, 61.
ECLI:EU:T:2012:46, DuPont Performance Elastomers, Case T 76/08, §§ 58, 61.
ECLI:EU:C:2012:479, International Inc, Joined Cases C 628/10 P and C 14/11 P, § 45.
ECLI:EU:C:2013:514, Stichting Administratiekantoor Portielje, Case C 440/11 P § 66.
BGH NJW 1962 196.
BGH Urt. v. 05.05.1981, KZR 9/80, §. 5.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
