Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Switzerland

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Antitrust for Small and Middle Size Undertakings and Image Protection from Non-Competitors

  • 494 Accesses

Abstract

The question posed at the outset concerns an issue that in Switzerland is again and again the subject of mainly political and also cartel law debates. Following the amendment of the Swiss Cartel Act (hereafter referred to as SCA) in 2003, a new provision was introduced that focuses on the “improvement of the competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises” [Article 6 para 1(e) SCA]. Previously in the public debate, the criticism was that the competition authorities were focusing their attention too much on small and medium-sized enterprises and too little on large market players.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    RS 251, available at http://www.weko.admin.ch/dokumentation/00160/index.html?lang=en.

  2. 2.

    Notice regarding the amendment of the Swiss Cartel Act of 7 November 2001, BBl 2002 2022, p. 2025; Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 70 ff.

  3. 3.

    Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, pp. 71 and 77 ff.

  4. 4.

    Neff Klaus, in: Basler Kommentar KG, Article 6 para 1(e) N 2.

  5. 5.

    Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 229 ff.

  6. 6.

    Cf., in general, also Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 233; Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 82.

  7. 7.

    Klotz Robert/Zurkinden Philippe, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf kleine und mittlere Unternehmen, Ein Vergleich zwischen der EU und der Schweiz [Applying Cartel law to small and medium-sized enterprises, a comparison between the EU and Switzerland], in: WuW 2/1999, p.120 ff.

  8. 8.

    Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 230.

  9. 9.

    Cf. Official Journal of the European Union dated 20 May 2003, p. 36 ff.; 2003/361/EG.

  10. 10.

    Cf. also Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 80 ff.

  11. 11.

    RS 221.301.

  12. 12.

    Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 233; Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 82.

  13. 13.

    Basler Kommentar KG-Jacobs Reto/Gion Giger, before Articles 12–17 N 5 and 10.

  14. 14.

    Para 3 lists agreements between companies at the same market level (horizontal agreements), while in para 4 agreements are listed between companies at different market levels (vertical agreements).

  15. 15.

    This view however is not uncontroversial in literature.

  16. 16.

    RPW/DPC 2010/4, p. 669, para 154 (RPW/DPC, the publication of the Swiss Competition Commission is available at http://www.weko.admin.ch/.

  17. 17.

    Cf. also Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 79 ff.

  18. 18.

    Different view, clearly, Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 84 ff.

  19. 19.

    Also Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 83, dispute this.

  20. 20.

    Cf. also Basler Kommentar KG-Neff Klaus, Article 6 para 1 e N 9; Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 83 ff.

  21. 21.

    The listing in Article 5 para 2 SCA is exhaustive, cf. Zäch Roger, Schweizerisches Kartellgesetz [The Swiss Cartel Act], 2nd edition, Bern 2005, p. 196; Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 83 ff.

  22. 22.

    Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 81.

  23. 23.

    Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 233; Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 82 ff.

  24. 24.

    Cf. also Basler Kommentar KG-Neff Klaus, Article 6 N 23 ff. and fig. 4 ff. KMU-BM N 1 ff.

  25. 25.

    Following on this Sect. 13.2.1.7

  26. 26.

    Cf. the notes in Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 83 ff.

  27. 27.

    Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 233.

  28. 28.

    What is notable however is that Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 92, interpret the word “insignificant” differently from the meaning in the sense of “to want to understand as justified” – which, as shown, would not correlate with the system in Article 5 Para. 2 and Article 6 SCA; what however hardly makes sense is that competition agreements are not economically efficient because microenterprises are part of them. “Insignificant” is to be understood based on the view here indeed in the sense of “insignificant”.

  29. 29.

    Cf. also Zäch Roger, Schweizerisches Kartellgesetz [The Swiss Cartel Act], 2nd edition, Bern 2005, para 511.

  30. 30.

    Cf. on the whole issue recently RPW/DPC 2012/1, p. 105, para 175.

  31. 31.

    Basler Kommentar KG-Krauskopf Patrick L./Schaller Olivier, Article 5 N 176 ff.

  32. 32.

    Cf. on this, however, section “Problem”, para 3.

  33. 33.

    Probably against RPW/DPC/DPC 2008/1, p. 214, para 11, second example.

  34. 34.

    Basler Kommentar KG-Krauskopf Patrick L./Schaller Olivier, Article 5 N 155 ff.

  35. 35.

    BGE 129 II 18, para 5.2.1.

  36. 36.

    BGE 129 II 18, para 5.2.1, with other refs.

  37. 37.

    Borer Jürg, Schweizerisches Kartellgesetz, Wettbewerbsrecht I [Swiss Cartel Act, Competition Law I], 3rd edition, Zürich 2011, Article 5 N 19.

  38. 38.

    Borer Jürg, Schweizerisches Kartellgesetz, Wettbewerbsrecht I [Swiss Cartel Act, Competition Law I], 3rd edition, Zürich 2011, cf. footnote 37; Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 233; Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 82.

  39. 39.

    BGE 129 II 18, para 5.2.1.

  40. 40.

    Cf. also Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, pp. 85 ff. and 101 ff.

  41. 41.

    Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 70, footnote 2.

  42. 42.

    RPW/DPC 2000/2, p. 167 ff.

  43. 43.

    Cf., e.g., RPW/DPC 2009/3, p. 196 f. (fitting companies); RPW/DPC 2012/2, p. 270 ff. (road construction and civil engineering in the Canton Aargau).

  44. 44.

    Cf. Basler Kommentar KG-Neff Klaus, Article 6 para 1(e) N 20; in 2008, WEKO held in a report that the SME Notice had proved itself since coming into force. “Consequently with regard to the interpretation of the SME notice only few enquiries came in. Most of these enquiries related to the question regarding the application of SCA in terms of hardcore restrictions between SMEs, a question which the SME Notice clearly answers”; cf. RPW/DPC 2008/1, p. 213 ff. para 7. Reference to rulings is however not to be found, and therefore “having stood the test of time” can only relate to the application by companies (which is why enquiries came in) and not to WEKO.

  45. 45.

    RPW/DPC 2010/1, p. 196, para 6.4.3 (judgment B-8115/2008; 7x2 AG v WEKO); RPW/DPC 2009/4, p. 465, in particular para 35.

  46. 46.

    Cf. Sect. 13.2.1.

  47. 47.

    RS 272.

  48. 48.

    RS 172.021.

  49. 49.

    Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 236.

  50. 50.

    It should moreover be noted that in Switzerland, for example, not just individuals but – as a matter of principle – legal entities too have a right to privacy; Cf. Article 13 Federal Constitution and Article 2 para 1 of the Data Protection Act (DSG).

  51. 51.

    BGE 135 II 60, para 3.2.3; RPW/DPC 2010/2, p. 358, para 8.1.3; Borer Jürg, Schweizerisches Kartellgesetz, Wettbewerbsrecht I [Swiss Cartel Act, Competition Law I], 3rd edition, Zürich 2011, Article 49a N 2; Basler Kommentar KG-Niggli Marcel A./Riedo Christof, before Articles 49a–53 N 43 a.

  52. 52.

    Cf. the references in Borer Jürg, Schweizerisches Kartellgesetz, Wettbewerbsrecht I [Swiss Cartel Act, Competition Law I], 3rd edition, Zürich 2011, Article 49a N 3, and Basler Kommentar KG-Tagmann Christoph/Zirlick Beat, Article 49a N 10.

  53. 53.

    Cf, instead of many others, Basler Kommentar KG- Niggli Marcel A./Riedo Christof, before Article 49a–53 N 70 ff. und Basler Kommentar KG- Tagmann Christoph/Zirlick Beat, Article 49a N 19 ff.

  54. 54.

    The Swiss Federal Court decided accordingly in a case concerning PubliGroupe on 29 June 2012; the written decision had not yet been published on 16 September 2012.

  55. 55.

    RS 312.

  56. 56.

    RS 152.3.

  57. 57.

    RS 235.1.

  58. 58.

    RPW/DPC 2012/2, S. 269, para 40.

  59. 59.

    See, in this regard, also Brunner Stephan C, in: Auer Christoph/Müller Markus/Schindler Benjamin (Hrsg.), Kommentar zum Bundesgesetz über das Verwaltungsverfahren (VwVG), Zürich/St. Gallen 2008, Article 26 N 12.

  60. 60.

    One possibility, for example, might be that the granting of the right to access to the file subject to the obligation mentioned constituted an order, so that a contravention of it could be sanctioned. The construction of a contract could also be considered. However, the consequences of breaching it are unclear. The other question was who the parties to this contract would be. Lastly, another option might be a procedurally justified right that, in the event of breach of the obligation referred to in the documents (in the rule), would be excluded from evidence.

  61. 61.

    Brunner Stephan C., in: Auer Christoph/Müller Markus/Schindler Benjamin (Hrsg.), Kommentar zum Bundesgesetz über das Verwaltungsverfahren (VwVG), Zürich/St. Gallen 2008, Article 26 N 10.

  62. 62.

    RPW/DPC 2011/4, p. 576, recital 326.

  63. 63.

    Basler Kommentar KG-Zirlick Beat/Tagmann Christoph, Article 26 N 49 ff. and Basler Kommentar KG, Bilger Stefan, Article 39 N 92 ff.

  64. 64.

    RPW/DPC 2010/4 p. 649 ff.

  65. 65.

    RPW/DPC 2010/1 p. 65 ff.

  66. 66.

    RPW/DPC 2010/4 p. 699, para 382 ff.

  67. 67.

    RPW/DPC 2010/1 p. 113 ff. recital 374 ff.

  68. 68.

    See, e.g., BGE 134 III 438, especially para 2; RPW/DPC 2003/2, p. 451 ff.; RPW/DPC 2010/4, p. 793 ff.

  69. 69.

    Borer Jürg, Schweizerisches Kartellgesetz, Wettbewerbsrecht I [Swiss Cartel Act, Competition Law I], 3rd edition, Zürich 2011, Article 12 N 3 ff.

  70. 70.

    RPW/DPC 2012/1, p. 105, para 175.

  71. 71.

    BGE 129 II 18, paras 5.2.1 and 5.2.2.

  72. 72.

    Cf, instead of many others, Ammann Martin/Strebel Mario, Die KMU-Bekanntmachung der WEKO [The WEKO SME notice], in: sic! 2007, p. 235 ff. und Ducrey Patrik/Tagmann Christoph, Die Anwendung des Kartellrechts auf KMU [Applying Cartel Law to SMEs], in: ZBJV 143/2007, p. 85 ff.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Niederer Kraft & Frey Ltd, Zurich, Switzerland

    Nicolas Birkhäuser

Authors
  1. Nicolas Birkhäuser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Birkhäuser .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Geneva, Switzerland

    Pranvera Këllezi

  2. Addleshaw Goddard, London, United Kingdom

    Bruce Kilpatrick

  3. Etude Hirsch Kobel, Geneva, Switzerland

    Pierre Kobel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Birkhäuser, N. (2014). Switzerland. In: Këllezi, P., Kilpatrick, B., Kobel, P. (eds) Antitrust for Small and Middle Size Undertakings and Image Protection from Non-Competitors. LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54000-4_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation