Competition Law: A National Perspective

Teigum, Siri

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24343-6_26

Siri Teigum²

1260 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the application of Articles 53 and 54 EEA from a national perspective, with a particular focus on the situation in Norway. The chapter addresses the implementation of the EEA competition rules in the EEA/EFTA States, the division of jurisdiction between ESA and the national competition authorities of the EEA/EFTA States and describes the national competition rules of the EEA/EFTA States in further detail. In addition, the chapter discusses the cooperation between ESA and the EFTA NCAs, and the cooperation between the national courts of the EEA/EFTA States and the EFTA Court and ESA.

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)

eBook: USD 139.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 179.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 249.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Note that the Commission may refer a notified concentration to an EFTA State in two situations pursuant to Article 6 of Protocol 24 to the EEA-Agreement. First, a case may be referred where the concentration ‘threatens to affect significantly competition in a market within that EFTA State, which presents all the characteristics of a distinct market’.
Second, the Commission may refer a case to an EFTA State where the concentration ‘affects competition in a market within that EFTA State, which presents all the characteristics of a distinct market and which does not constitute a substantial part of the territory covered by the Agreement’.
2.
OJ C 227, 21.9.2006, p. 10 and EEA Supplement No 47, 21.9.2006, p. 1.
3.
Paragraph 18 of ESA’s Notice on cooperation within the EFTA Network of Competition Authorities.
4.
Commission staff working document ‘Ten years on Antitrust Enforcement under Regulation 1/2003’ paragraph 263.
5.
ESA’s annual report for 2014 p. 26.
6.
ESA’s annual report for 2014 p. 27.
7.
OJ C 305, 14.12.2006, p. 19 and EEA Supplement No 62, 14.12.2006, p. 21.
8.
2006/C 305/10 paragraph 15.
9.
Case C-234/89 Delimitis v. Henninger Brdu AG [1991] ECR I-935.
10.
Rt. 2000 p. 1811 (Finanger).
11.
E-18/11 Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd. vs. Kaupthing Bank [2012] EFTA Ct. Rep. 592.
12.
LOV-2004-03-05-11 Lov om gjennomføring og kontroll av EØS-avtalens konkurranseregler mv. (EØS-konkurranseloven).
13.
See also Article 28 of Protocol 4 Chapter II of Protocol 4 SCA.
14.
C-2/88 Zwartveld [1990] ECR I-3365 and T-353/94 Postbank v. Commission [1994] ECR II-1141.
15.
Case C-2/88 Zwartveld, cited above.
16.
2006/C 305/10, paragraph 26.
17.
I.e. land and means of transport, including the homes of directors, managers and other members of staff of the undertakings.
18.
Cases E-7/01 Hegelstad Eiendomsselskap Arvid B. Hegelstad and Others v. Hydro Texaco AS [2002] EFTA Ct. Rep. 312; E-8/00 Norwegian Federation of Trade Unions and Others v. Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities and Others [2002] EFTA Ct. Rep 114; E-3/97 Jan Kristian Jæger AS v. Opel Norge AS [1998] EFTA Ct. Rep 1; E-4/05 HOB-vìn v. the Icelandic State and the State Alcohol and Tobacco Company of Iceland [2006] EFTA Ct. Rep 4 E-18/14 - Wow air ehf. v. The Competition Authority, Isavia ohf. and Icelandair ehf. [2014] EFTA Ct. Rep. 1304.
19.
Regulation 2012-06-22-570.
20.
Regulation 2005-04-29-367. This exemption only covers Section 10 of the Competition Act.
21.
Regulation 2004-04-23-651.
22.
Regulation 2009-09-09-1169.
23.
See for example V2002-26 Statkraft Holding AS/Agder Energi AS and the Ministry’s decision of 14 October 2002 in the same case 02/3165, and V2009-14 Validus AS/Sunkost ASA.
24.
Ot. prp. nr 6 (2003–2004) p. 229.
25.
See for example V2005-12 Prior Norge BA/Nordgården AS and the Ministry’s decision of 2 February 2006 in the same case 05/03763.
26.
The competition authorities of the EFTA States were not empowered to apply Articles 53 and 54 EEA prior to 20 May 2005.
27.
Case V2013-3 Veidekke ASA/Veidekke Industri AS and NCC AB/NCC Roads AS, V2008-5 Brenntag Nordic AS and V2008-4 Borregaard Industies Ltd.
28.
Case V2011-12 Ski Follo Taxi, V2011-11 Icopal Tak AS/Fløysand Tak AS, V2009-17 Gran & Ekran AS/Grunnarbeid AS, V2009-15 Norges Turbileierforbund, V2009-7 Taxi Midt-Norge AS, V2008-18 Håkonrune Rør AS/Oslo VVS Service AS, V2008-1 Bergen Sentrum øre nese hals.
29.
Case V2007-2 Tine BA.
30.
See for example E-3/97 Jan og Kristian Jæger AS v. Opel Norge AS (Case TNERO-1995-1663 and LE-1999-156), E-7/01 Hegelstad and others v. Hydro Texaco, cited above, and E-8/01 Gunnar Amundsen AS and others v. Vectura AS, cited above. The latter case was, however, withdrawn by the Court of Appeal before the EFTA Court issued its advisory opinion and has no official reference.
31.
KT-2013-3V.
32.
Case TOSLO-2013-76559.
33.
See section 6.5 of the decision.
34.
Statements made in; Supreme Court Case Rt. 2012 p. 1556 (Gran Ekran) section 74, Preparatory work Ot.prp.nr.6 (203–2004) p. 241.
35.
Statement made in preparatory work NOU 2003:12 Ny konkurranselov p. 61.
36.
Borgarting Lagmannsrett LB-2014-76039 NCC Roads, NCC AB v. the Norwegian State.
37.
E-8/00 was referred to the EFTA Court by the Labour Court of Norway. In addition to the its three other references, Borgarting Court of Appeal requested an advisory opinion in E-8/01 Gunnar Amundsen AS and others v. Vectura AS, cited above. However, the case was withdrawn from the Court of Appeal before the EFTA Court had time to issue its advisory opinion.
38.
E-7/01 Hegelstad and others v. Hydro Texaco, cited above.
39.
E-3/97 Jan og Kristian Jæger AS v. Opel Norge AS, cited above.
40.
See ESA’s decision in case no. 59120 Color Line of 14 December 2011. ESA imposed a fine of 18 million Euro. Color Line did not appeal the decision, and it became final in February 2012.
41.
Judgment of 22 September 2014 (LB-2013-178315).
42.
Case C-446/06 Danske Slagterier v. Budesrepublik Deutschland [2009] ECR I-2119.
43.
Borgarting Lagmannsrett LB-2014-76039, NCC Roads, NCC AB v. the Norwegian State.
44.
Ot.prp.nr.6 (2003–2004) p. 68.
45.
The Norwegian Competition Authority’s annual report for 2013 p. 20.

References

Commission staff working document ‘Ten years on Antitrust Enforcement under Regulation 1/2003’
Google Scholar
The Norwegian Competition Authority’s annual report (2013)
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Advokatfirmaet Thommessen AS, Oslo, Norway
Siri Teigum

Authors

Siri Teigum
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Siri Teigum .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

EFTA Court, Luxembourg, Luxembourg
Carl Baudenbacher

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Teigum, S. (2016). Competition Law: A National Perspective. In: Baudenbacher, C. (eds) The Handbook of EEA Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24343-6_26

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24343-6_26
Published: 12 December 2015
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-24341-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-24343-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics