EU ANTITRUST: HOT TOPICS & NEXT STEPS

Prague, Czechia

EU ANTITRUST: HOT TOPICS & NEXT STEPS 2022

based on more stable basis. Therefore, the convincing justification of a merger for the competition authorities usually heavily relies on economic terms in the sense that there will be no or very minimal anticompetitive results of the merger. EU guidelines do include a large amount of very vague terms such as “ reasonable assurance ”, “ sufficient increase ” or “ possible harm to the consumer ”. The interpretation of the benefits of a merger can be almost impossible to quantify and always depend on the interpretation in given time using certain set of values and interests. Also, in terms of obligations being imposed on merging undertakings, this is very much in control of the parties, so being able to present the authority with a convincing analysis provided by experts can very much outweigh the potential anti-competitive effects of the merger. As already suggested in the introduction chapter, it is therefore extremely necessary to equip competition authorities (both at the national and EU level) with a sufficient personal base of experts, being able to assess and question economic analyses provided by merging competitors, as these tend to underestimate risks for the relevant market and on the other hand overestimate benefits for such market. A question therefore arises if the process should not be more levelled, in the sense of authority also having a possibility to propose various obligations to be fulfilled in order for the merger to proceed. [2] Act No. 150/2002 Sb., Code of administrative justice, as amended. [3] Act No. 500/2004 Sb., Administrative Procedure Code, as amended. [4] Act No. 143/2001 Sb., On the Protection of Competition and on the Amendment of Certain Acts (Act on the Protection of Competition), as amended. [5] Bejček, J (1996). Existenční ochrana konkurence . Brno: Masaryk University. [6] Bishop, M., Walker, S (2010). The Economics of EC Competition Law: Concepts, Application and Measurement. London: Sweet & Maxwell. [7] Decree of the Office No. 252/2009 Sb., on the requirements for a proposal to allow a merger of competitors. [8] Decree 294/2016 Sb., on the details of the justification of the proposal for the ap proval of a merger of competitors and documents certifying the facts decisive for the merger. [9] Eliáš, K., Bejček, J., Hajn, P., Ježek, J. et al. (2007). Soutěžní právo. Kurs obchodního práva. Obecná část. Praha: C. H. Beck. [10] Faull, J., Nikpay, A. (2007). The EC Law of Competition . New York: Oxford Univer sity Press. [11] Munková, J., Kindl, J., Svoboda, P. (2012). Soutěžní právo. Praha: C.H. Beck. References [1] Act No. 89/2012 Sb., Civil Code, as amended.

279