Published July 30, 2021 | Version v2
Book chapter Open

ECN+ Directive and Projected Changes in Polish Competition Law: Towards the Political and Judicial Independence of the Polish Competition Authority

Creators

  • 1. University of Warsaw

Description

This unit was published in „International Cooperation of Competition Authorities in Europe: from Bilateral Agreements to Transgovernmental Networks” Błachucki, M., ed., (2020).

The ECN+ Directive aims to create a ‘homogeneous’ plane for the operation of antitrust authorities in the EU. Therefore, it is intended above all to harmonise the functioning of the national competition authorities in all the Member States, so that they can exercise the same powers and apply identical legal instruments when enforcing EU competition law. This article describes how to implement the ECN+ Directive into Polish antitrust law. Ensuring objective standards for the appointment of the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection is the basic way to achieve this goal.

Files

RAFAŁ STANKIEWICZ.pdf

Files (533.7 kB)

Additional details

References

  • Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty, OJ L 001, 04/01/2003, p. 001-0025.
  • KOWALIK-BANCZYK, K. (2012) Procedural Autonomy of Member States and the EU Rights of Defence in Antitrust Proceedings, Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies, 6, pp. 220–222.
  • Directive 2014/104/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2014 on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union, OJ L 349, 5/12/2014, pp. 1-19.
  • Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 to empower the competition authorities of the Member States to be more effective enforcers and to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market, OJ L 11, 14/11/2019, p. 3-33.
  • EC, Commission staff working document SWD(2014) 230/2, Ten years of antitrust enforcement under Regulation 1/2003 accompanying the document communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Achievements and Future Perspectives {COM(2014) 453} {SWD(2014) 231}. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/swd_2014_230_ en.pdf [Accessed September, 12 2020]; EC, Commission staff working document, Brussels, July, 9 2014, SWD(2014) 231 fnal. Enhancing competition enforcement by the Member States' competition authorities: institutional and procedural issues Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. Ten years of antitrust enforcement under Regulation 1/2003: Achievements and future perspectives {COM(2014) 453 fnal} {SWD(2014) 230 fnal}, point 43. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014SC0231&from=EN [Accessed September, 12 2020].
  • KOWALIK-BANCZYK, K. (2019) Dyrektywa ECN+ – sposób na podwyzszenie ochrony prawnej przedsiębiorców w postępowaniach antymonopolowych?. Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 10, p. 5.
  • THOMAS, S., DUEÑAS, M. (2018) The Draft Provisions on Antitrust Fines in the Commission's ECN+ Proposal, Zeitschrift für Wettbewerbsrecht, 1, p. 2.
  • PODRECKI, P., MROCZEK, M., MENSZIG-WIESE, K. (2019) O potrzebie zastąpienia Prezesa UOKiK kolegialnym organem ochrony konkurencji. internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny, 5, p. 13.
  • BERNATT, M. (2012) Ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów – potrzeba nowelizacji. Perspektywa sprawiedliwości proceduralnej. internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny, 1, p. 87; BŁACHNIO-PARZYCH A. (2012) The Nature of Responsibility of an Undertaking in Antitrust Proceedings and the Concept of 'Criminal Charge' in the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory, 5, p. 54; KRÓL-BOGOMILSKA, M. (2013) Zwalczanie karteli w prawie antymonopolowym i karnym. Warszawa: Scholar, p. 205 et seq.
  • MATEUS, A.M. (2007) Why Should National Competition Authorities be Independent and How Should They be Accountable?. European Competition Journal, 1, p. 17–30.
  • MATERNA, G. (2019) Gwarancje niezalezności organu ochrony konkurencji w dyrektywie ECN+ a status Prezesa UOKiK. Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 10, p. 20.
  • OTTOW, A. (2015) Market and Competition Authorities: Good Agency Principles. Oxford: OUP, p. 74.
  • BERNATT, M. (2019) Niezalezność polskiej administracji. Czas zmian. Rzeczpospolita of February, 8 2019.
  • BECKER, T.E. (1998) Integrity in Organizations: Beyond Honesty and Conscientiousness. Academy of Management Review, 23, p. 154.
  • KOZAK, M. (2019) Raz, dwa, trzy, niezalezny będziesz ty… O konieczności szerszego spojrzenia na niezalezność polskiego organu antymonopolowego w świetle dyrektywy ECN+,. internetowy Kwartalnik Antymonopolowy i Regulacyjny, 6, p. 25.
  • BŁACHUCKI, M. (2019) Ponadnarodowe sieci organów administracji publicznej oraz ich wpływ na krajowy porządek prawny (na przykładzie ponadnarodowych sieci organów ochrony konkurencji), Warszawa: ILS PAS, p. 354 and subseq. Available from: http://www.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1494958.
  • BOVENS, P., CURTIN, D., HART, M. 't (2012) The EU's Accountability Defcit: Reality or Myth?. In: Bovens, P., Curtin, D., Hart, M. 't (eds.) The Real World of EU Accountability What Defcit?. Oxford: OUP, p. 37.
  • OGUS, A. (1994) Regulation: Legal Form and Economic Theory. Oxford: OUP, p. 111.
  • The Commission's EC, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, COM(2014) 453. Ten years of antitrust enforcement under Regulation 1/2003: Achievements and Future Perspectives {SWD(2014) 230}_{SWD(2014) 231}. Available from: https:// ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/antitrust_enforcement_10_years_en.pdf [Accessed September, 12 2020].
  • The Act on Competition and Consumer Protection of 16 February 2007, Dz.U. 2019, item 369 as amended).
  • Kmieciak, Z. (2002) Postępowanie w sprawach ochrony konkurencji a koncepcja procedury hybrydowej. Państwo i Prawo, 4, p. 46-47.
  • Comments of the SPK to the Draft of January 22, 2019. ACT of [...] amendments to the Act on competition protection and certain other acts, Warsaw January, 30 2019. Available from: http://www. spk.com.pl/uploads/pdf/2019-01-31/190130_Uwagi%20SPK%20do%20nowelizacji%20uokik.pdf [Accessed September, 12 2020].