Category archives for РЕЗЮМЕ/SUMMARIES / RÉSUMÉS / ZUSAMMENFASSUNGEN

The Servier Case Before the General Court: A New Chapter of the Litigation Saga on Anticompetitive Agreements Impeding the Generic Drug Trade

Dimitar Manolchev[1]   In the past year, the French pharmaceutical company Servier has been involved in heavy litigation before the EU courts. A number of pharmaceutical companies (Niche/Unichem, Matrix, Teva, Krka and Lupin), producing the generic variation of the drug perindopril, produced originally by Servier, had decided to enter the market, challenging the validity of […]

Reviewable Acts in European Union Antitrust Law

Alexander Kornezov[1]   The article draws up a catalogue of the reviewable acts and failures to act in European antitrust law. Naturally, the action for annulment laid down in Article 263 TFEU is the most frequently used remedy in EU anti-trust law. The Commission adopts a wide range of measures both in the course of […]

LA COMPÉTENCE DE LA COUR DE JUSTICE UE DANS LE DOMAINE DE LA POLITIQUE ÉTRANGÈRE ET DE SÉCURITÉ COMMUNE DE L’UNION

(L’évolution de la jurisprudence)   Jasmine Popova[1]   Le présent article vise à présenter – à travers l’analyse d’un arrêt d’une grande importance qu’a rendu la Cour de Justice de l’Union Européenne, statuant en grande chambre, le 28 mars 2017, dans l’affaire Rosneft (C‑72/15, EU:C:2017:236) – l’évolution de la jurisprudence de la Cour relative à […]

ECJ’S perspective for selective distribution in the era of Amazon and eBay

Judgment of 6 December 2017, Coty Germany, C‑230/16, EU:C:2017:941   Eleonora Mateina[1]   The purpose of the article is to outline the key aspects of the selective distribution systems and to review the most significant decisions of the ECJ dedicated to this topic, i.e. decisions under cases С-230/16 (Coty); case С-439/09 (Pierre Fabre); cade С-26/76 (Metro) […]

Неохотен разказвач: Съдът на ЕС, тълкуване на международни договори и сагата със Западна Сахара

Коментар на решенията на Съда на ЕС по дела C‑104/16 P Council v Front Polisario и C-266/16 Western Sahara Campaign UK   Момчил Миланов[1]     Западна Сахара е бивша испанска колония под контрола на Мароко от 1975 г., която все още фигурира в списъка с несамоуправляващи се територии според чл.73 от Устава на ООН. Фронт […]

Les initiatives citoyennes ont-elles pu réellement renforcer la démocratie participative ?

Radostina Stefanova-Kamisheva[1]   La volonté des auteurs du traité de Lisbonne de favoriser la démocratie participative en permettant à un million de citoyens émanant de sept Etats membres de demander à la Commission de présenter une proposition n’a pas connu un grand succès. A ce jour, dix-sept initiatives ont été refusées, quinze retirées, vingt-six n’ont […]

Гео-блокирането – най-неевропейското нещо?

Божана Витанова[1]   Целта на настоящата статия е бъдат анализирани и предложени конкретни решения за регулацията на гео-блокирането (тази регулация следва да не бъде нито твърде “строга”, тъй като така би могла да възпре напредъка и иновациите, нито твърде “либерална”, тъй като не би отчела потребностите на потребителите и по-малките предприятия). Както при всяко ново […]

Une nouvelle possibilité dʼaccès au juge de cassation en Bulgarie: contradiction dʼune décision du juge dʼappel aux décisions de la Cour de justice de L’Union européenne

Stanislav Kostov[1]   Conformément à l‘article 280, alinéa 1, point 2 du Code de la procédure civile bulgare après son amendement en octobre 2017, une décision du juge d‘appel peut être soumise au contrôle de la Cour de cassation si cette décision, inter alia, contredit aux décisions de la Cour de Justice de l‘Union européenne. […]

Върховенството на закона в Европейския съюз – от възникването му до днес

Решение от 25 юли 2018 г., Minister for Justice and Equality (Недостатъци на съдебна система), C‑216/18 PPU, EU:C:2018:586 Paolo Giusta [1]   Авторът проследява в статията си възникването на принципа за върховенството на закона в рамките на правната рамка на Европейския съюз до конкретното му приложение понастоящем. Той отбелязва, че още от декларацията на Шуман от 1950 […]

THE INTEL CASE – A GAME OF PROOF

Judgment of 6 September 2017, Intel v Commission, C‑413/14 P   Aleksandar Dorich[1] On 6 September 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union delivered the long-awaited Intel judgment. This case was strongly debated as it concerns major legal issues related to the granting of exclusivity rebates by a dominant undertaking. In its judgment, the Court […]

STANDARD OF PROOF OF “EXCESSIVE PRICING” PRACTICES UNDER EUROPEAN UNION COMPETITION LAW – ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES STEMMING FROM THE RECENT CASE-LAW OF THE CJUE

Oleg Temnikov[1] The author presents in this article the Judgment of the CJEU of of 14 September 2017 in the case Autortiesību un komunicēšanās konsultāciju aģentūra/Latvijas Autoru apvienība, C 177/16. He makes an overview of the conclusions adopted by the Court in its judgement and elaborates on the possible consequence for the application in the […]

ACTIONS FOR DAMAGES UNDER BULGARIAN LAW FOR PROTECTION OF COMPETITION AND DIRECTIVE 2014/104/EU IN THE LIGHT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW

Deyan Draguiev[1]   The article analyses the amendments of Bulgarian law and more specifically of the Bulgarian Protection of Competition Act adopted in the beginning of 2018 in order to implement EU Directive Directive 2014/104/ЕС, also known as the Competition Damages Directive. Under the changes promulgated by Bulgarian State Gazette No. 2/2018, a new Section […]

APPLICATION DU DROIT DE L’UNION DANS DES SITUATIONS PUREMENT INTERNES. COMPÉTENCE DE LA COUR DE JUSTICE DE L’UNION EUROPÉENNE D’INTERPRÉTER LE DROIT DE L’UNION EN DEHORS DE SON CHAMP D’APPLICATION

Alexander Kornzezov[1] Radostina Stefanova-Kamisheva[2]     La question de savoir si le droit de l’Union trouve à s’appliquer dans des situations purement internes figure parmi les plus difficiles en droit de l’Union et secoue l’esprit de la doctrine et de nombre d’avocats généraux depuis des décennies. La jurisprudence à cet égard paraît assez casuistique, voire […]

Tying and Bundling according to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Bulgarian Commission for Protection of Competition

Eleonora Mateina[1]   The purpose behind the article is to summaries and briefly analyse the key decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Commission (Decision dated 17 September 2007 in case T-201/04 R, Microsoft/Commission; Decision dated 12 December 1991 in case Т-30/89, Hilti/ Commission and Decision dated 24 July […]

ANTICOMPETITIVE AGREEMENTS RESTRICTING TRADE WITH GENERIC DRUGS

Analysis of ECJ’s case law and Commission’s administrative practice in cases Lundbeck, Johnson & Johnson and Servier   Dimitar Manolchev[1]   The present article analyses the compatibility of pay-for-delay agreements with Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in light of several recent cases before the European Commission and the […]

The European Idea for a Reform of the Investor-State Dispute Settlement System in The Light of Opinion of Advocate General Wathelet in Achmea, C-284/16

Ekaterina Dimitrusheva[1], Ivaylo Dimitrov[2]     On 19 September 2017 the Advocate General (AG) to the Court of Justice to the European Union (CJEU) Melchior Wathelet delivered his long-awaited Opinion in Case C-284/16 Slowakische Republik v Achmea BV. The Bundesgerichtshof (“German Federal Court of Justice”) requested a preliminary ruling from the CJEU on the compatibility […]

Practical Questions on the Application of the ne bis in idem Principle. Examination of the Case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and Bulgarian Courts According to Interpretative Judgment No. 3/ 2015 of the Bulgarian Supreme Court of Cassation

Elena Zinovieva, Ivan Stefanov[1]   The application of the ne bis in idem principle in the context of competition between criminal and administrative-criminal liability has created a contradictory national case law, and therefore the General Assembly of the Criminal College of the Supreme Court of Cassation (GACC of SCC) delivered Interpretative Decision No. 3 on […]

THE DUTY TO COOPERATE AND ITS EFFECTS ON COMPETENCE IN EU MIXED AGREEMENTS

Ass. Prof. Dr. Todor Kolarov [1]     The article discusses different manifestations of the duty to cooperate in EU external relations. It starts with some preliminary remarks on the meaning of the notions “duty to cooperate” and “loyal cooperation” and the difference between them. It explains that “loyal cooperation” is demonstration of the “duty […]