<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Kluwer Competition Law Blog</title>
	<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com</link>
	<description>Kluwer Competition Law Blog &#124; Wolters Kluwer Law &#38; Business</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 14:28:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	<!-- generator="WordPress/3.2.1" -->

	<item>
		<title>America Movil abuse of dominance case seems to be a”happy-end” story but not for everybody</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Everybody at America Movil (”AM”) – and especially its owner, Mr.Carlos Slim – should have welcomed with a sense of relief the (somehow unexpected) turn in the saga which started last year when the Mexican Federal Competition Commission (“CFC”) hit &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/05/15/america-movil-abuse-of-dominance-case-seems-to-be-a%e2%80%9dhappy-end%e2%80%9d-story-but-not-for-everybody/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/05/15/america-movil-abuse-of-dominance-case-seems-to-be-a%e2%80%9dhappy-end%e2%80%9d-story-but-not-for-everybody/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>The Dispute between Qihoo 360 and Tencent: What We Have Seen Thus Far</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The feud between the Chinese Internet companies Qihoo 360 Technology Co., Ltd. (‘Qihoo 360’) and Tencent Inc. (‘Tencent’) has been simmering for nearly two years. This article spotlights the facts and major issues of the dispute. The Facts Tencent runs &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/05/10/qihoo-360-v-tencent/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/05/10/qihoo-360-v-tencent/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Competition Commission prohibition of completed merger a warning to companies that do not wait for UK merger clearance</title>
		<description><![CDATA[A recent CC decision, <em>Stericycle/Ecowaste Southwest</em>, in which it prohibited a completed merger and required the divestment of the acquired business, is a salutary reminder to companies that do not wait for merger clearance before completing their transaction. <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/05/08/competition-commission-prohibition-of-completed-merger-a-warning-to-companies-that-do-not-wait-for-uk-merger-clearance-3/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/05/08/competition-commission-prohibition-of-completed-merger-a-warning-to-companies-that-do-not-wait-for-uk-merger-clearance-3/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Behavioural Economics and EU Competition Law: Knocking on Open Doors? The Case of Art. 102 TFEU</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The discussion on the merit and feasibility of a possible application of Behavioural Economics in Competition Law and Policy has been fierce, particularly so in the context of US Antitrust Law. The fundamental assumption of Behavioural Economics lies in the &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/05/02/behavioural-economics-and-eu-competition-law-knocking-on-open-doors-the-case-of-art-102-tfeu/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/05/02/behavioural-economics-and-eu-competition-law-knocking-on-open-doors-the-case-of-art-102-tfeu/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Size and noise</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The bigger they are, the harder they fall and the sounds of the crash get louder as the legal controls get weaker. Take, for instance, the recent £807.2m sale of Edinburgh airport to Global Infrastructure Partners. This is the latest &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/29/size-and-noise/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/29/size-and-noise/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>A lesson on judicial review from the other European Court in Luxembourg</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Legal change sometimes takes unpredictable paths: mid-April, something important happened for European law in Luxembourg, but this did not come from the European Court of Justice (the “ECJ”). Not every reader of this blog is necessarily aware that the ECJ &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/27/a-lesson-on-judicial-review-from-the-other-european-court-in-luxembourg/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/27/a-lesson-on-judicial-review-from-the-other-european-court-in-luxembourg/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Conference announcement: 19th St.Gallen International Competition Law Forum ICF (June 7th and 8th)</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The Institute of European and International Business Law from the University of St.Gallen, Switzerland is pleased to invite you to the 19th St.Gallen International Competition Law Forum ICF on June 7th and 8th 2012. Once again, leading experts in national, &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/26/conference-announcement-19th-st-gallen-international-competition-law-forum-icf-june-7th-and-8th/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/26/conference-announcement-19th-st-gallen-international-competition-law-forum-icf-june-7th-and-8th/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Crackdown on IT Obstruction of Dawn Raids</title>
		<description><![CDATA[At the end of March, the European Commission fined Czech energy companies Energetický a průmyslový and EP Investment Advisors EUR2.5 million for obstructing a dawn raid which European Commission officials carried out as part of an antitrust investigation. This is &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/25/crackdown-on-it-obstruction-of-dawn-raids/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/25/crackdown-on-it-obstruction-of-dawn-raids/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Interim Measures in the UK: Towards Better Protection for Complainants?</title>
		<description><![CDATA[On 15 March 2012, almost exactly a year after it launched its consultation concerning possible reforms to the UK competition regime, the UK Government’s Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (&#8220;BIS&#8221;) announced the changes that it had decided to implement, &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/24/interim-measures-in-the-uk-towards-better-protection-for-complainants/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/24/interim-measures-in-the-uk-towards-better-protection-for-complainants/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Confusion remains: ECJ in Tomra repeats conflicting dicta on de minimis</title>
		<description><![CDATA[That the ECJ rejected Tomra&#8217;s appeal was unsurprising. The strictures of the EU case law on illegal rebates for dominant companies is well known. The case law of the Court takes a near per se approach to condemning any rebate &#8230; <a href="http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/20/confusion-remains-ecj-in-tomra-repeats-conflicting-dicta-on-de-minimis/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<link>http://kluwercompetitionlawblog.com/2012/04/20/confusion-remains-ecj-in-tomra-repeats-conflicting-dicta-on-de-minimis/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>

