CYIL vol. 9 (2018)

CYIL 9 ȍ2018Ȏ ADDRESSEES OF ANTITRUST AND STATE AID LEGISLATION IN EUROPEAN… laws apply without such limitations; when a certain anticompetitive conduct is scrutinised by a national competition authority, it is thus typically the case that both the EU and national competition law are applied in parallel. 46 National competition laws of EU Member States thus in principle need to be in line with EU law. The Czech Republic and Slovakia used to be one state for more than 70 years and they share the same legal traditions; they joined the EU at the same time and they went through the same process of approximation to EU law. It might therefore be expected that their approach to the addressees of competition law would be identical; surprisingly, it is not the case, as will be discussed below. 1. The Czech Republic In the Czech Republic, national competition law is governed by the Czech Competition Act of 2001. 47 The Czech Competition Act employs the term undertaking, 48 its definition is however different from the EU one. 49 In the past, this led the Czech Competition Authority (hereinafter referred to as “CCA”) to proclamations that only legal entities (as opposed to economic ones) may be the addressees of Czech competition law, 50 the courts however unequivocally proclaimed that the “Czech” term undertaking is to be interpreted fully in line with EU law, notwithstanding the actual definition in the Czech Competition Act: “[definition of the undertaking] in the Competition Act is a result of harmonization of Czech law […] and employment of case-law and administrative practice of the EC in order to interpret it is fully justified. […][T]he term ‘undertaking’ used in the [Competition Act] corresponds with the term ‘undertaking’ in the Treaty Establishing the European Communities”. 51 The precise wording of the definition of the undertaking has become less important since then and the CCA generally refers directly to EU law. 52 46 In detail, see e.g. ROSE, V., BAILEY, D .: European Union Law of Competition. Seventh Edition . Oxford University Press, 2013, pp. 73-76. 47 Act. No. 143/2001 Coll., on the protection of competition, as amended. The Czech Competition Act is available in English at: [accessed 25 June 2018] (unofficial translation of the Czech Competition Authority). 48 Under the Czech terminology, the Czech Competition Act uses the term “enterprise” (in Czech soutezitel ), whereas the Czech version of theTFEU translates the term “undertaking” as podnik ; when the Czech Competition Act is translated into English, the term “undertaking” is nonetheless used. The relevance of this terminological difference has been extensively discussed in Czech professional literature, the generally agreed conclusion is that it does not have any practical impact; see e.g. KINDL, J.: Podnik nebo soutěžitel – záleží na tom? [Undertaking or Enterprise – does it matter?]. Právní rozhledy, 2006 (5), p. 161. 49 Czech Competition Act, Section 2 (1), reads as follows: “ Undertakings under this Act shall be deemed to mean natural or legal persons, their associations, associations of such associations and other groupings, even in the instance that such associations and groupings are not legal persons, provided they take part in competition or may influence competition by their activities, although they are not entrepreneurs” . 50 In detail, see e.g. PETR, M.: Podniky, koncerny, dceřiné společnosti… kdo vlastně odpovídá za porušení soutěžního práva? [Enterprises, Concerns, Subsidiaries… Who is Responsible for Breaches of Competition Law?]. ANTITRUST , 2013 (1), p. 45. 51 Judgement of the Supreme Administrative Court of 29 October 2007, Ref. No. 5 As 61/2005. 52 In detail, see e.g. PETR, M., op. cit. sub 50.

181