No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2017
One of the most notable changes in the forty years since I left Cambridge at the end of my Law Tripos has been the growth in importance of a number of legal subjects previously either totally unknown, known but disregarded, or of interest only to an enthusiastic minority. Competition law certainly fell into one of these categories, not then being taught as a separate subject or even perhaps referred to by any lecturer, except on occasion in the context of “contracts in restraint of trade”. But now the subject has truly come of age and, like some other important commercial law topics which have deservedly earned a place within the regular syllabus of the L.L.M, finds itself referred to constantly not only in academic and professional literature but in the media. Its influence on our daily lives as citizens and consumers means that it is often the subject of headline reports (not always accurate) quite apart from its economic and political significance in the regional, national, European and world context. For example, to mention only one or two current issues, we have had the court case brought by the Office of Fair Trading against the Premier League challenging its collective sale to BSkyB of the television rights to Premier League football matches, and, major changes proposed in the UK defence industries as a result of the proposed acquisition by British Aerospace of the GEC defence businesses.
1 Section 6–11 and 47–56
2 By the Monopolies and Mergers Act 1965.
3 Under the terms of the EC Merger Regulation no. 4064/89 as amended by Regulation No. 1310/97.
4 Sections 51–56 of the Fair Trading Act provide these powers to the Secretary of State for monopoly references though the Director General himself can also make such references under Section 50 (subject to a theoretical veto from the Secretary of State under Section 50(6)). With regard to mergers only the Secretary of State can make a reference to the Competition Commission (though he normally does so on the recommendation of the DGFT), under Section 64 (existing merger situation) or Section 75 (arrangements in contemplation which may result in the creation of a merger situation).
5 By the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices (Inquiry and Control) Act.
6 The “Chapter One” provisions comprise Sections 2 to 16, the “Chapter Two” provisions sections 18–24.
7 Cases 89, 104, 114, 116–117, 125–129/85 Ahlstrom v. Commission [1988] ECR 5193: 4 CMLR 901.
8 490 US 93 (1989); see Hawk, B.E. and Veltrop, J.D., “Dual Antitrust Enforcement in the United States: Positive or Negative Lessons for the European Community”, in Procedure and Enforcement in EC and US Competition Law, ed., Slot, P. and McDonnell, A. (Sweet and Maxwell, London, 1993), 30 Google Scholar.
9 Column 1325, House of Lords debate, 5 March 1998.