Abstract
In the preliminary comments on the limits of the jurisdiction of the Community in antitrust matters at the outset of the study we observed that the assumption of Community jurisdiction over enterprises and arrangements external to the Common Market is subject not only to Community law but also to the principles of international law. See 1–12 et seq. The present chapter is concerned with the impact on the Community of those limitations which international law generally imposes on the extraterritorial reach of a State’s legislative and enforcement jurisdiction.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Those questions are raised by Mann in the article: “The Dyestuffs in the Court of Justice of the European Communities” 22 Int. & Comp. L.Q. 42–43 (1973).
The only case known to us in which such issues were discussed is the I.C.I. Case (see submissions and arguments of the parties, 625–626 and 629.)
Case 22/70, (1971] E.C.R. 263. See also Case 3/76, Kramer [19761 E.C.R. 1279. References to literature on the point under consideration in the text can be found in L. Collins, European Community Law in the United Kingdom 3–4 (1975); Costouis, “Treaty Making Powers of the EEC; Art. 238 and Association Agreements” 15 European Year Book (1967) 31.
The I.C.I. Case 692–693. The Treaty provisions which the Advocate-General mentioned in the opinion are Art. 113 and 114 (negotiation of commercial agreements), Art. 228 and 238 (conclusion of international agreements in general) and Art. 210.
See Hug “The Applicability of the Provisions of the European Community Treaties Against Restraints of Competition to Restraints of Competition Caused in Non-Member States, But Affecting the Common Market” in Cartel and Monopoly in Modern Law vol. 2, 649, (1961).
Stat. 872 (codified in scattered sections of 19 and 26 U.S.C.A. (Supp. 1962)). For the purpose of interpreting American legislation, it may be noted that the concept of “country” in U.S. statutes is not confined to nations, but may be applied to other political entities, including a supranational community. Cf. Burnet v. Chicago Portrait Co. 285 U.S. 75–76 (1932).
See for example Sec. 33 of the Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States (1965)(hereinafter cited as “Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law”) which adopts the protective principle “provided the conduct is generally recognized as a crime under the law of States that have reasonably developed systems”. For an elaboration of this view see Riedweg (rapporteur) in I.L.A. Tokyo Conference 368.
See Final Report of European Advisory Committee on Tentative Draft No.2, Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the U.S. (Jurisdiction) March 3, p.15 et seq. (1961) Extracts from the report can be found in I.L.A. Tokyo Conference 543.
See explanations to the report of the Committee by Hunter in I.L.A. The Hague Conference 233 (and examples thereof). See also I.L.A. Tokyo Conference 368; eventually a guideline along that line was adopted in the form of Art. 6 of the International Law Association’s final resolution (see New York Conference 139).
See Mann“The Doctrine of Jurisdiction in International Law” 111 Recueil (1964-I) pp.97–98.
According to some views the use of the principle of nationality is essentially applicable to the group of offences which each State considers heinous only when they are committed by nationals, e.g. offences such as treason. See. ibid. See also A. Acevedo, A Conflict of Criminal Laws 180, an unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The Senate House, University of London (1973).
Allen, “The Development of European Community Antitrust Jurisdiction Over Alien Undertakings” 2 Legal Issues of European Integration 60 (1974).
See British Practice in International Law (1969) pp.58–59 (E. Lauterpacht ed.).
See extracts from the Committee’s report in I.L.A., Tokyo Conference 542.
See Malawer, “International Law, European Community Law and theRule of Reason” 8 J.W.T.L. 45 (1974).
For a general commentary on objections of strict territoriality see Miller “Extraterritorial Effects of Trade Regulation” 111 U.Pa.L.Rev. 1111 (1963); Brewster “Extraterritorial Effects of the U.S. Antitrust Laws; An Appsisal” 11 A.B.A., Antitrust Section Report 69 (1957); Jessup Transnational Law ch. 2, (1956); Katzenbach “Conflicts on an Unruly Horse: Reciprocal Claims and Tolerance in Interstate and International Law” 65 Yale L.J. 1087 (1956).
See J. Rahl, Common Market and American Antitrust; Overlap and Conflict 62 (1970).
W. Fugate, Foreign Commerce and Antitrust Laws 38 (2nd ed. 1973). See also K. Brewster, Antitrust and American Business Abroad 300 (1958).
Cf. Kruithof “The Application of the Common Market Antitrust Provisions to International Restraints of Trade” 2 C.M.L.Rev. 81 (1964).
Compare Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law sec. 7(2). See also Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law 305 (2nd Ed. 1973); Huntter in I.L.A. The Hague Conference 222.
See Mann, supra note 15 at 14. Mann, nevertheless, states that this approach depends on the specific facts. See also De Arechanga, “International Law in the Past Third of a Century” 159 Recueil (1978-I) pp.276–277.
See Schwartz “Applicability of National Law on Restraints of Competition to International Restraints of Competition” in Cartel and Monopoly in Modern Law Vol. 2, pp.706 (1961).
Ibid. Objections to service of process abroad by despatch through the post may, however, be found in the Hague Convention on the Law of Civil Procedure of 1954, which allows service through the post only where treaties so provide or where the receiving State raises no objection, and in Art. 6 of the Harvard Research in Judicial Assistance 33 Am.J.Int.L.Supp. 65 (1939). It is difficult, in our view,to find any conclusive guidance on that point in international law, apart from pointing out that there are examples of service of process abroad through the post in State practice, e.g. Germany (see 5–9). Guarding the standards of justice in these matters, as stated by the Court of Justice, is an indispensible requirement to that practice.
The U.K. Government thinks otherwise (see Aide Mémoire to the EEC Commission, cited in British Practice in International Law, supra note 19), but Akehurst states that this is surely wrong (see “Jurisdiction in International Law” 46 Brìt.Y.B.Int.L. (1975) p.209 in n.3).
See Brierly, The Law Of..Nations 278–281 (6th ed. 1963); Harvard Draft Convention on Jurisdiction with Respect to Crime 29 Am.J. Int.L.Supp. Art. 12 (pp.601–602)(1935).
See I. Baxter, Essays on Private Law: Foreign Law and Foreign Judgments 13 (1966).
See Jessup, Modern Law of Nations 104–105 (1950); Lissitzyn “The Meaning of the Term Denial of Justice in International Law” 30 Am,J.Int.L. 645–646 (1936).
See, for example, Council of Europe, Explanatory Report on the European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Judgments (1970) pp.49 et seq. (to be found in I.L.R. vol. 38, p.133).
Jennings “Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and the United States Antitrust Laws” 33 Brit.Y.B.Int.L. (1957) p.171. See also Riedweg, supra note 50, at 409.
See Verzijl “The Controversy Regarding the So-Called Extraterritorial Effect of the American Antitrust Laws” 8 Nederlands Tijdschrift voor International Recht 12 (1961).
See, for example, Lawrence “American Conception of Jurisdiction With Respect to Conflicts of Laws on Crime” 30 Transactions of the Grotius Society 184 (1944).
Report to the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe by the Legal Committee (de Grailly, rapporteur), The Extraterritorial Application of Antitrust Legislation Doc.2123 at 8, 11–12, 14 (Jan. 25, 1966).
See similar view by Verzijl, supra note 55, at 14; Metzger “The Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States; Bases and Conflicts of Jurisdiction” 41 N.Y.Un.L.Rev. 15 (1960).
Compare Restatement of Conflict of Laws s.94 (1934) with Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws s.53 (1971).
See, for example, Oppenheim International Law vol. 1, pp.295–296. (8th ed., Lautherpacht, 1955).
For example see Manual of Public International Law 359–360 (Sirensen ed. 1968).
Jennings “General Course on the Principles of International Law” 121 Recueil (1967-II) pp.522–528.
General material on the defence of “sovereign immunity” can be found in Fawcett, “Trade and Finance in International Law” 123 Recueil (1968-I) 224–230; Kincaid, “Sovereign Immunity of Foreign State-Owned Corporation” 10 J.W.T.L. 110–128 (1976).
For example see g 39(1) of the Restatement (Second of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States (1965).
It has, however, been argued by Seidl-Hohenveldern that the principle non bis in idem is also valid ininternational law and therefore he criticises the approach of theCourt of Justice (see in the article: “Limits Imposed by International Law on the Application of Cartel Law” 5 The Int. Lawyer 289 (1971).
H. Kronstein, The Law of International Cartels 482 (1973)
Cf. D. Swann, Competition and Consumer Protection 233 (1979).
See Riedweg (rapporteur) in I.L.A., Tokyo Conference 385.
For a general review of the legal position of national export cartels in the Member Countries of the OECD, see OECD, Report of the Committee of Experts on Restrictive Business Practices, Export Cartels (1974).
There have been a number of reports and studies which have analyzed the nature and effects of these export associations and have considered the pros and cons of allowing them to exist. For example see Weiner and Parzych, “The Webb-Pomerence Export Trade Act; A United States Antitrust Exemption” 6 J.W.T.L. 119–127 (1972).
See Wertheimer “The International Firm and International Aspects of Policies in Mergers” in Monopolies, Mergers and Restrictive Practices (J. Heath ed., 1974); Kintor and Joelson, An International Antitrust Primer ch.8 (1974).
UNCTAD, Restrictive Business Practices; Studies on the United Kingdom of GreatBritain and Northern Ireland, United States of America and Japan 29–33 (edited by D. Swann and D. Greer and UNCTAD Secretariat resp., 1973)(TD/B/390). See also UNCTAD, Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development Third Session, (Santiago) 213–255 (1973).
Of particular interest is the UNCTAD Report of the Ad Hoc Group of Experts, Restrictive Business Practices in Relations to the Trade and Development of Developing Countries (1973)(Doc.TD/B/C.2/119).
See Kirshnamurti “National and Supra-National Antitrust Legislation; Concerns, Aspirations and Requirements of the Developing Countries” in Cartel and Antitrust Law; Speeches of an International Conference 213–216 (Gettlieb Duttweilen Institute, Oct. 1973). See also OECD, Committee of Experts on Restrictive Business Practices, Restrictive Business Practices of Multinational Enterprises secs. 13–43 (1977) thereinafter cited “OECD, Restrictive Business Practices of Multinational Enterprises”).
Seeibid. sec. 36. However, the OECD Report also shows that such enterprises can produce substantial beneficial effects on national and international competition (see secs. 26–47). The literature on multinational corporations is voluminous and mostly listed in the recent Bibliography of MultinationalCnrporations and Foreign Direct Investment (to March 1978) by D. growndorf & S. Riemer.
See Edwards “The Internationality of Economic Interests” 111 U.Pa.L.Rev. 185 et seq. (1962).
See Oliver “The Harmonization of Laws and the Development of Principles for the Resolution of Conflicts of Enforcement Jurisdiction as to Transnational Monopolistic and Restrictive Trade Practices” in I.L.A. Tokyo Conference 544.
See R. Baxter “Settlement of Disputes” in I.L.A.,Tokyo.Conference 200; a resolution to that effect was adopted by the Conference (see pp. 169–170).
See H. Zwarensteyn, Some Aspects of the Extraterritorial Reach of the American Antitrust Laws 88–92 (1970).
For a general discussion of past efforts to control international restrictive business practices see Furnish “A Transnational Approach to Restrictive Business Practices” 4 The Int. Lawyer 318–351 (1970).
See UNCTAD Resolution 89(IV); see elaborations in Eighth Report on Competition Policy points 48–49; Seventh Report on Competition Policy points 72–73; Sixth Report on Competition Policy points 43–44; Fifth Report on Competition Policy point 18.
The EEC status is in accordance with Resolution 1995 (XIX) of the UN General Assembly, adopted 30 December 1964.
OECD Doc. C(67) 53 Final of 10 Oct. 1967, reprinted in Markert, “Recent Developments in International Antitrust Cooperation” 13 Antitrust Bull. 370–372 (1968).
OECD, Recommendation of the Council Concerning A Consultation and Conciliation Procedure on Restrictive Business Practices Affecting International Trade, C(73) 99 (Final) December 1973.
See Supplementary Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on the OECD (14 December 1960).
Text of the Agreement of 23rd June, 1976, has been published in the Official Journal of the Federal Republic of Germany (BBGL II of 23.10.1976).
Private interviews with Mr. Pappalardo, Head of Inspection and Studies DiNision at the Directorate-General for Competition, on 2nd October, 1979, and with Mr. F. Benyon, from the same Division on 3rdOctober, 1979.
Even in an earlier case involving a Justice Department Grand Jury proceeding for obtaining documents from Germany, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit followed similar guidelines for consideration of interests. See In the matter of the Grand Jury Subpoena Addressed to First National City Bank 396 F. 2d. 897, 901–902 (2d Cir. 1968). Facts of the case are given in 5–59.
Note, “Extraterritorial Application of the Antitrust Laws: A Conflict of Laws Approach” 70 Yale L.J. 259 (1961); Trautman “A Study of the International Environment; The International Reach of American Regulatory Legislation Other Than the Sherman Act” in Brewster, supra note 35,at 312; Ongman “Be No Longer A Chaos; Constructing A Normative Theory of the Sherman Act’s Extraterritorial Jurisdictional Scope” 71 Northw. U.L.Rev. 733 (1977); Stanford “The Application of the Sherman Act to Conduct Outside the United States; A View from Abroad” 11 Cornell Int.L.J. 209–210(1978).
The balancing approach poses the question of the scope of considerations which are essentially matters of degree and involve a multitude of changing factual circumstances. For example see factors mentioned in Brewster, supra note 35, at 446; compare Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws $ 6 (1971) with Restatement (Second) of the Foreign Relations Law of the U.S. at g 40 (1965). An examination of interests to be taken into account in various circumstances is given by A. Von Mehren and D. Trautman in The Law of Multistate Problems; Cases and Materials on Conflict of Laws, ch. III (1965).
Books
Barounos, D., Hall, D.F. and James, J.R., EEC Antitrust Law; Principles and Practice(London, 1975 ).
Baxter, I.F.G., Essays on Private Law: Foreign Law and Foreign Judgments(Toronto, 1966 ).
Beale, J.H., A Treatise on the Conflict of Laws, Vol. 3,(New York,1935).
Bebr, G., Judicial Control of the European Communities(London,1962).
Bellamy, C.W. and Child, G.D., Common Market Law of Competition( 2nd ed., Morris, A.L., Asst., London, 1978 ).
Blake, H.M. (ed.),Business Regulation in the Common Market Nations. vols. 1, 2, 3,(New York, 1969 ).
Brewster, K., Antitrust and American Business Abroad(New York, 1958 ).
Brierly, J.L.,The Law of Nations: An Introduction to the International Law of Peace( 6th ed., Waldock, H., Oxford, 1963 ).
Brownlie, I., Principles of Public International Law(2nd ed., Oxford, 1973 ).
Cheatham, E.E., Griswald, E.N., Reese, W.L.M. and Rosenberg, M., Cases and Materials on Conflict of Laws(5th ed., New York, 1964 ).
Cheshire, G. and North, P.M., Private International Law(9th ed., London,1974).
Collins, L., European Community Law in the United Kingdom(London,1975).
Common Market Reporter; Doing Business in Europe(CCH ed., New York, loose leaf).
Cross, R. and Johes, P.A., An Introduction to Criminal Law(7th ed., London 1972 ).
Crotti, A.F., Trading Under EEC and United States Antitrust Laws(London,1977).
Cunningham, J.P., The Fair Trading Act 1973; Consumer Protection and Competition Law(London,1974).
Deringer, A. and Others, The Competition Law of the EuropeaiEconomic Community( CCH ed., Chicago, 1968 ).
Edwards, C.D., Control of Cartels and Monopolies; An International Comparison(New York, 1967 ).
EEC Commission, Practical Guide to Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty of Rome(Brussels, 1962)(reprinted in Campbell, Common Market Law, Vol. 2, sec. 2605 (1969)). XIX
Ehrenzweig, A.A., A Treatise on the Conflict of Laws(St. Paul, 1962 ).
Friedmann, W.G. (ed.), Antitrust Law; A Comparative Symposium(London,1956).
Fugate, W.L., Foreign Commerce and the Antitrust Laws(2nd ed., Boston, 1973 ).
George, K.D. and Joll, C. (eds.), Competition Policy in the United Kingdom and the EEC(London,1975).
Gijlstra, D.J. and Murphy, D.F. (eds.), Leadinq Cases and Materials on the Competition Law of the EEC(1976).
Goldman, B., European Commercial Law(London,1973).
Goodrich, H.F., Handbook of the Conflict of Laws( 4th ed., Scoles, E.F. St. Paul, 1964 ).
Gower, L.C.B., The Principles of Modern Company Law(3rd ed.,London,1969).
Graupner, R., The Rules of Competition of the European Economic Community; A Study of the Substantive Law on a Comparative Law Basis(The Hague, 1965 ).
Hermann, A.H. and Jones, C., Fair Trading in Europe(London,1977).
Honig, F., Brown, W.J., Gleiss, A. and Hirsch, M., Cartel Law of the European Economic Community(London,1963).
Jessup, P.C., Transnational Law; Storrs Lectures on Jurisprudence(New Haven, 1956 ).
Joliet, R. Monopolization and Abuse of Dominant Position: A Comparative Study of the American and European Approaches to the Control of Economic Power(The Hague, 1970 ).
Joliet, R., The Rule of Reason in Antitrust Law; American, German and Common Market Laws in Comparative Perspective(Liege, 1967).
Kepteyn, P.J.G. and Van Themaat, P.V., Introduction to the Law of the European Communities; After the Accession of New Member States(London,1973).
Kintor, W. and Joelson, M.R., An International Antitrust Primer(New York, 1974 ).
Korah, V., Competition Law of Britain and the Common Market(London,1975).
Korah, V. An Introduction Guide to EEC Competition Law and Practice(Oxford,1978).
Kronstein, H., The Law of International Cartels(Cornell, 1973 ).
Kronstein, H., Miller, J.T. and Schwartz, I.E., Modern American Antitrust Law; A Guide to its Domestic and ForeignApplication(New York,1958).
Leigh, L.H., The Criminal Liability of Corporation in English Law(London,1969).
Lipstein, K., The Law of the European Economic Community(London,1974).
McLachlan, D. and Swann, D., Competition Policy in the European Community(Oxford,1967).
McNair of Gleniffer, McNair, A.D., The Legal Effects of War(3rd ed., Cambridge, 1948 ).
Nussbaum, A., Principles of Private International Law(New York,1943).
Oberdorfer, C.W., Gleiss, A. and Hirsch, M., Common Market Cartel Law(CCH 2nd ed., Chicago, 1971 ).
OECD, Guide to Legislation on Restrictive Business Practices(Paris, loose leaf).
OECD, Restrictive Business Practices; Comparative Summary of Legislation in Europe and North America(Paris,1964).
Oppenheim, L.F.L., International Law, Vol. 1,(8th ed., Lauterpacht, H., London,1963).
Oppenheim, S.C. and Weston, G.E., Federal Antitrust Laws( 3rd ed., St. Paul, 1968 ).
Rahl, J.A., Common Market and American Antitrust; Overlap and Conflict(New York,1970).
Salmond, J.W.,On Jurisprudence(11th ed., London,1957).
Surit, H. and Herzog, P. (eds.),Columbia Law School Project on European Legal Institutions; The Law of the European Economic Community, Vol. 2,(New York,1976).
Spirensen, M. (ed.), Manual of Public International Law(London,1968).
Swann, D., Competition and Consumer Protection(London,1979).
Temple-Lang, J., The Common Market and Common Law; Legal Aspects of Foreign Investment and Economic Integration in the European Community, with Ireland as a Prototype(Chicago,1966).
Turner, J.W.C. (ed.), On Crime by W.O. Russell(12th ed.,London,1964).
Van Cise, J.G., The Federal Antitrust Laws(rev. ed., Washington,1955).
Von Mehren, A.T. and Trautman, D.T., The Law of Multistate Problems; Cases and Materials on Conflict of Laws(Boston, 1965 ).
Wheaton, H., Elements of International Law, Vol. 1,(6th English ed., London,1929).
Whiteman, M.M. (ed.), Digest of International Law, Vol. 1,(Washington, 1963),and Vol. 6 (Washington,1965).
Wilberforce, R.O., Campbell, A. and Elles, N., The Law of Restrictive Trade Practices and Monopolies(2nd ed. London,1966 and Supplements incl. 1969 and 1973 ).
Williams, G.L.,Criminal Law; The General Part(2nd ed.,London,1961).
Wolff, M., Private International Law(2nd ed.,Oxford,1950).
Zwarensteyn, H., Some Aspects of the Extraterritorial Reach of the American Antitrust Laws(The Netherlands,1970).
Articles
Acevedo, “The EEC Dyestuffs Case: Territorial Jurisdiction” The Modern Law Review36 317 (1973).
Akehurst,“Jurisdiction in International Law” British Year Book of International Law46 145 (1975).
Allen, “The Development of European Community Antitrust Jurisdiction Over Alien Undertakings” Legal Issues of European Integration2 35 (1974).
Baker, D., “Antitrust and World Trade; Tempest in an International Teapot?” Cornell International Law Journal8 16 (1974).
Baxter, “Extraterritorial Application of the Domestic Law” University of British Columbia Law Review1 333 (1959).
Beckett, “Criminal Jurisdiction Over Foreigners” British Year Book of International Law8 108 (1927).
Bentill, “Control of the Abuse of Monopoly Power in EEC Business Law” Common Market Law Review12 59 (1975).
Brewster, “Extraterritorial Effects of the United States Antitrust Laws, An Appraisal” American Bar Association, Antitrust Section Rep. 11 64 (1957).
Buxbaum, “The Applicability of German Cartel Law to Licenses of Foreign Patents” Antitrust Bulletin8 925 (1963).
Carlston, “Antitrust Policy Abroad” Northwestern University Law Review49 569 (1954).
Caudy, Note, “Sherman Antitrust Law; Applicability to Foreign Commerce” Cornell Law Quarterly37 821 (1952).
Cohn and Simitis,“’Lifting the Veil’ in the Company Laws of the European Continent” International and Comparative Law Quarterly12 189 (1963).
Costouis, “Treaty Making Powers of the EEC; Article 238 and Association Agreements” European Year Book15 31 (1967).
Crawford, “The Criteria for Statehood in International Law” British Year Book of International Law48 93 (1977).
Dashwood, “The Principle of Direct Effect in European Community Law” Journal of Common Market Studies16 229 (1978).
De Aréchaga, “International Law in the Past Third of a Century” Recueil159 1 (1978-I).
Del Marmol and Fontaine, “Protection Against the Abuse of Economic Power in Belgium; The Law of May 27, 1960” University of Pennsylvania Law Review109 922 (1961).
Dietz, “Enforcement of Antitrust Laws in the EEC” The International Lawyer6 742 (1972).
Douglas and Shanks, “Insulation from Liability Through Subsidiary Corporations” Yale Law Journal39 193 (1929).
Edwards, C., “The Internationality of Economic Interests” University of Pennsylvania Law Review111 183 (1962).
Fawcett, “Trade and Finance in International Law” Recueil123 215 (1968I).
Fitzmaurice, “The General Principles of International Law Considered from the Standpoint of the Rule of Law” Recueil92 1 (1957II).
Forcione, “Intra-Enterprise Conspiracy Under the Antitrust Regulations of the Common Market” The Business Lawyer25 1419 (1970).
Fugate, “The Common Market and the United States Antitrust Laws” New York University Law Review38 458 (1963).
Furnish, “A Transnational Approach to Restrictive Business Practices” The International Lawyer4 317 (1970).
Graupner, “Commission Decision-Making on Competition Questions” Common Market Law Review10 291 (1973).
Haight, “International Law and Extraterritorial Application of the Antitrust Laws” Yale Law Journal63 639 (1954).
Hanbury, “The Territorial Limits of Criminal Jurisdiction” Problems of Public and Private International Law, The Grotius Society37 171 (1952).
Ho11mann, “Problems of Obtaining Evidence in Antitrust Litigation; Comparative Approaches to the Multinational Corporation” Texas International Law Journal11 461 (1976).
Hug, “The Applicability of the Provisions of the European Community Treaties Against Restraints of Competition to Restraints of Competition Caused in Non-Member States, But Affecting the Common Market” Cartel and Monopoly in Modern Law, Vol. 2, 639 (1961).
Hunnings, “Enforceability of the EEC-EFTA Free Trade Agreements” 2 European Law Review 163 (1977) and rejoinder in 3 European Law Review 278 (1978).
Jennings, “Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and the United States Antitrust Law” British Year Book of International Law33 146 (1957).
Jacquemin, “Application to Foreign Firms of European Rules of Competition” Antitrust Bulletin19 157 (1974).
Jennings, “General Course on Principles of International Law” Recueil121 327 (1967-II).
Jennings, “The Limits of State Jurisdiction” Nordisk Tidskrift for International Recht32 209 (1962).
Katzenbach, “Conflicts on an Unruly Horse: Reciprocal Claims and Tolerances in Interstate and International Law” Yale Law Journal65 1087 (1956).
Kincaid, “Sovereign Immunity of Foreign State-Owned Corporation” Journal of World Trade Law10 110 (1976).
Koppensteiner, “International Enterprises Under the Antitrust Law of the European Economic Community” Journal of World Trade Law9 287 (1975).
Korah, “ The Control of Mergers Under Article 86 of the Rome Treaty; Continental Can” Current Legal Problems26 82 (1973).
Korah, “Istituto Chemioterapico Italiano Spa and Commercial Solvents Corporation v. Commission of the European Communities” Common Market Law Review11 248 (1974).
Krause, “The Multi-Corporate International Business Under Section 1 of the Sherman Act-Intra-Enterprise Conspiracy Revisited” The Business Lawyer17 912 (1962).
Krishnamurti, “National and Supra-National Antitrust Legislation; Concerns, Aspirations and Requirements of the Developing Countries” in Cartel and Antitrust Law: Speeches of an International Conference213 ( Gettlieb Duttweilen Institute, October 1973 ).
Kruithof, “The Application of the Common Market Antitrust Provisions to International Restraints of Trade” Common Market Law Review2 69 (1964).
Lawrence, “American Conception of Jurisdiction with Respect to Conflicts of Laws on Crime” Transactions of the Grotius Society30 184 (1944).
Lever, “The Extraterritorial Jurisidction of the Restrictive Practices Court” International and Comparative Law Quarterly,Supplement Publication,No. 6, 117 (1963).
Lissitzyn, “The Meaning of the Term Denial of Justice in International Law” American Journal of International Law30 632 (1936).
McCoy, “The United States Parent Corporation-European Subsidiary Relationship Under the European Antitrust Regulations” Virginia Journal of International Law8 46 (1963).
McQuade, “Conspiracy, Multicorporate Enterprises and Section 1 of the Sherman Act” Virginia Law Review41 191 (1956).
Malawer, “International Law, European Community Law and the Rule of Reason” Journal of World Trade Law8 17 (1974).
Mann, “The Doctrine of Jurisdiction in International Law” Recueil111 9 (1964I).
Mann, “The Dyestuffs Case in the Court of Justice of the European Communities” International and Comparative Law Quarterly22 35 (1973).
Mann, “Illegality and the Conflict of Laws” Modern Law Review21 130 (1958).
Mann, “Prerogative Rights of Foreign States and the Conflict of Laws” Transactions of the Grotius Society40 25 (1955).
Markert, “The Application of German Antitrust Law to International Restraints on Trade” Virginia Journal of International Law7 47 (1967).
Markert, “Recent Developments in International Antitrust Cooperation” Antitrust Bulletin13 355 (1968).
Metzger, “The Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States; Bases and Conflicts of Jurisdiction” New York University Law Review41 7 (1966).
Miller, “Extraterritorial Effects of Trade Regulation” University of Pennsylvania Law Review111 1092 (1963).
Mok, “The Cartel Policy of the EEC Commission 1962–1967” Common Market Law Review6 67 (1968).
Murray, “Case Note, Case 48/69, Dyestuffs Cases” Virginia Journal of International Law13 375 (1973).
Nebolsine, “Foreign Enterprises Under the Common Market Antitrust Rules” New York University Law Review38 479 (1963).
Note, “Extraterritorial Application of the Antitrust Laws; A Conflict of Laws Approach” Yale Law Journal70 259 (1961).
Note, Harvard International Law Journal14 621 (1973).
Note, “Limitations on the Federal Judicial Power to Compel Acts Violating Foreign Law” Columbia Law Review63 1441 (1963).
Note, “The Substantive Rules of Antitrust in the Common Market; Analysis and Approach” Stanford Law Review17 263 (1965).
Ongman, “Be No Longer A Chaos: Constructing a Normative Theory of the Sherman Act’s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Scope” Northwestern University Law Review71 733 (1977).
Rahl, “American Antitrust and Foreign Operations; What is Covered?” Cornell International Law Journal8 1 (1974).
Rahl, “A Rejoinder” Cornell International Law Journal8 42 (1974).
Riesenfeld, “The Protection of Competition” in American Enterprise in the European Common Market; A Legal Profile, Vol. 2, (E. Stein and T. Nicholson, eds.) 197 (1960).
Rom, “Restrictive Business Practices in EEC Agreements with Less Developed Countries” Journal of World Trade Law12 36 (1978).
Sarkar, “The Proper Law of Crime in International Law” International and Comparative Law Quarterly11 446 (1962).
Schapiro, “The German Law Against Restraints of Competition; Comparative and International Aspects” Columbia Law Review I, 62 236 (1962).
Schwartz, I., “Applicability of National Law on restraint of Competition to International Restraints of Competition” Cartel and Monopoly in Modern Law, Vol. 2, 701 (1961).
Seidl-Hohenveldern, “Limits Imposed by International Law on the Application of Cartel Law” The International Lawyer5 279 (1971).
Sheffer, “The Restrictive Business Practices Law” Economic Quarterly14 163 (No. 54–55, October 1967 ).
Skiöld, Ake, “Antitrust Problems in Connection With Dealings With The Common Market Countries” in the International Bar Association, Ninth Conference Report, 192 (Edinburgh, 1962 ).
Stanford, “The Application of the Sherman Act to Conduct Outside the United States; A View From Abroad” Cornell International Law Journal11 195 (1978).
Steindorff, “Annotations on the Decisions of the European Court in the Dyestuff Cases of July 14, 1972” Common Market Law Review9 502 (1972).
Suetens, “Belgium Antitrust Law ‘In Action’” Common Market Law Review2 325 (1964).
Temple-Lang, “The Procedure of the Commission in Competition Cases” Common Market Law Review14 155 (1977).
Timberg, “United States and Foreign Antitrust Laws Governing International Business Transactions” in A Lawyer’s Guide to International Business Transactions(Surrey and Shaw, eds.) 619 (1966).
Trautman, “A Study of the International Environment; The International Reach of American Regulatory Legislation Other Than The Sherman Act” in Antitrust and American Business Abroad(K. Brewster) 309 (1958).
Van Oven, “The Intra-Enterprise Conspiracy Paradox” in European Competition Policy111 (1973).
Verzijl, “The Controversy Regarding the So-Called Extraterritorial Effect of the American Antitrust Laws” Nederlands Tijdschrift voor International Recht8 3 (1961).
Waelbroeck, “Enforceability of the EEC-ERTA Free Trade Agreements; A Reply” European Law Review3 27 (1978).
Weiner and Parzych, “The Webb-Pomerence Export Trade Act; A United States Antitrust Exemption” Journal of World Trade6 119 (1972).
Whitney, “Sources of Conflict Between International Law and the Antitrust Laws” Yale Law Journal63 655 (1954).
Willis and Pitofsky, “Antitrust Consequences of Using Corporate Subsidiaries” New York University Law Review43 20 (1968).
Other Sources
American Bar Association, Antitrust Developments 1955–1968, A Supplement to the Report of the Atty. Gen. Nat. Comm. to Study the Antitrust Laws (Chicago, 1968).
American Bar Association, Proceedings, Antitrust Section Conference on Antitrust and the European Communities (Brussels and Luxembourg, Sept. 23–26, 1963).
Antitrust Division, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Antitrust Guide for International Operations (1977), reprinted in BNA Antitrust and Trade Req. Reports, No. 799 (1977), and Trade Req. Reports (CCH) No. 226, pt. II (1977).
British Aide-Memoire to the Commission of the European Communities of 20 October 1969. (Text in British Practice in International Law (1969), pp.58–60 (E. Lauterpacht ed.).
Council of Europe, Explanatory Report on the European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Judgments (1970).
Council of Europe, Report to the Consultative Assembly by the Legal Committee (de Grailly, rapporteur), The Extraterritorial Application of Antitrust Legislation, Doc. 2123 (Jan. 25, 1966).
E.C. Commission, Seventh General Report;April 1963 - March 1964 (June 1964).
E.C. Commission, Eighth General Report;l April 1964–31 March 1965 (June 1965.
E.C. Commission, First General Report on the Activities of the Communities; 1967 (February 1968).
E.C. Commission, First Report on Competition Policy (April 1972).
E.C. Commission, Second Report on Competition Policy (April 1973).
E.C. Commission, Third Report on Competition Policy (May 1974).
E.C. Commission, Fourth Report on Competition Policy (April 1975).
E.C. Commission, Fifth Report on Competition Policy (April 1976).
E.C. Commission, Sixth Report on Competition Policy (April 1977).
E.C. Commission, Seventh Report on Competition Policy (April 1978).
E.C. Commission, Eighth Report on Competition Policy (April 1979).
Final Report of the European Advisory Committee on Tentative Draft No.2, Restatement of the Foreign Relations Law of the U.S. (Jurisdiction) ZA.L.I. 1961).
Harvard Draft Convention on Jurisdiction with Respect to Crime 29 American Journal of International Law Supplement 439 (1935).
Harvard Research in International Law, Jurisdiction With Respect to Crime 29 American Journal of International Law Supplement 435 (1935) Part II.
House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, 94th Cong., 2nd Session, Hearings on International Uranium Supply and Demand Before the Sub-Committee on Oversight and Investigations (1976).
House Judiciary Committee, 89th Cong., 2nd Session, Hearings on International Aspects of Antitrust Before the Sub-Committee on Antitrust and Monopoly (1966).
House Judiciary Committee, 90th Cong., 2nd Session, Hearings on Economic Concentration; Concentration Outside the United States Before the Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly (1968).
International Law Association, Report of the Fifty First Conference Tokyo (1964).
International Law Association, Report of the Fifty Second Conference, Helsinki (1966).
International Law Association, Report of the Fifty Third Conference, Buenos Aires (1968).
International Law Association, Report of the Fifty Fourth Conference, The Hague (1970).
International Law Association, Report of the Fifty Fifth Conference, New York (1972).
Johnson, Bases of International Jurisdiction, Report of the International Law Conference 1962 (The David Davis Memorial Institute of International Studies).
OECD, Report of the Committee of Experts on Restrictive Business Practices, Export Cartels (Paris, 1974).
OECD, Report of the Committee of Experts on Restrictive Business Practices, Restrictive Business Practices of Multinational Enterprises (Paris,1977).
Report of the Attorney General’s National Committee to Study the Antitrust Laws (Washington, 1955).
UNCTAD, Report of the Ad Hoc Group of Experts, Restrictive Business Practices in Relation to the Trade and Development of Developing Countries (1973)(Doc. TD/B/C.2/119).
UNCTAD, Report of the Third Ad Hoc Group of Experts on Restrictive Business Practices, 6th Session (April 17–27, 1979)(TD/250; TD/B/C.2/201; TD/B/C.2/AC.6/20).
UNCTAD, Restrictive Business Practices: Studies on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America and Japan (edited by D. Swann and D. Greer and UNCTAD Secretariat resp., 1973)(TD/B/390).
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Report of Group of Eminent Persons, The Impact of Multinational Corporations on Development and on International Relations, UN Doc.E/5500/Rev. 1st/ESA/6 (1974).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1981 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Barack, B. (1981). The Extraterritorial Scope of the EEC Jurisdiction in Antitrust Cases from the perspective of International Law and the Methods for the Resolution of International Conflicts. In: The Application of the Competition Rules (Antitrust Law) of the European Economic Community to Enterprises and Arrangements External to the Common Market. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-4482-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-4482-9_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-4484-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-4482-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive