Peter Rowland’s Post

📢 The European Commission has released a major update to the Market Definition Notice, the first since 1997, marking a new era for EU competition law. The revision aims to enhance transparency and legal certainty for businesses across sectors by adapting EU competition guidance to the digital age. Key updates include: ✅ Focus on non-price competition factors such as innovation, quality, and sustainability. ✅ Specific guidance for navigating digital markets and innovation-driven sectors. ✅ Forward-looking assessments to address rapidly evolving market dynamics. ✅ Updated geographic market definition and market share calculation metrics. 🎯 This version emphasizes the collaborative effort and strategic foresight behind the revision, catering to a professional audience interested in the implications of these regulatory changes. Press release: 👇https://lnkd.in/dxU9_zxu Market definition notice: 👇 https://lnkd.in/dNrsZC3j #EUCompetitionLaw #MarketDefinition #MarketDefinitionNotice #DigitalEconomy #DigitalMarkets #Innovation #EuropeanCommission #TrojanEconomics

On Monday (18 March), we discuss the new Market Definition Notice with Thomas Buettner (EU Competition Policy) and Magali Eben (University of Glasgow). Join us at 4pm Vienna time! To register: https://lnkd.in/dBRuCpSk #MarketDefinition #DigitalMarkets #CompetitionLaw

If you have not yet made it through the 188 pages of the Competition and Markets Authority's Guidance on the Digital Markets Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (or the 452 pages of the Act itself) then never fear - grab a coffee and you can watch (or just listen) to our discussion on some of the main features of the new regime. Many thanks to Oles Andriychuk and the Digital Markets Research Hub for the invitation, and to my panelists Lara Dimitrova Stoimenova and Max von Thun-Hohenstein Yoshioka for their excellent contributions. #DMCCA #digitalmarkets #coffeebreakcontent ********************************************************************** The UK has finally adopted its long-awaited legislation establishing a new pro-competition regime for digital markets. To discuss the main features of the Digital Markets Competition and Consumers Act we organised a panel ( 📹 https://lnkd.in/e-su58-9) with three remarkable participants. Lara Dimitrova Stoimenova – Managing Director of Sigma Economics (ex-Ofcom & CMA) Sarah Long – Partner at Euclid Law Firm Max von Thun-Hohenstein Yoshioka - Director of Europe & Transatlantic Partnerships at the Open Markets Institute Among the topics receiving attention of the speakers are the following: ✔ Open-endedness of goals: bug or feature? ✔ Comparing legislative processes in the EU (the DMA) & the UK (the DMCCA) ✔ The CMA consultation on new digital markets competition guidance ✔ Is the requirement of having so many mandatory consultations good or bad for a new regime? ✔ What potential implications should the CMA be mindful of when consulting on the new guidance bearing in mind the life of Art 102 Guidance Paper ✔ Formally, unlike the DMA, the DMCCA is not a new start but a continuation of competition policy: implications ✔ The elegance of the formula "the CMA [...] will apply this guidance flexibly and may depart from the approach described where there is an appropriate and reasonable justification for doing so" ✔ The level of judicial scrutiny and the role of judicial authorities in the new architecture. ✔ Discussing (the relationship between the) two autonomous procedures: "Conduct Requirements" & "Pro-Competition Interventions" ✔ Changes in merger control ✔ Final offer mechanism (DMCCA) vs. FRAND terms (DMA) ✔ Recommendations to students New video 🎬 https://lnkd.in/e-su58-9

The Commission adopts first revised Market Definition Notice in more than 20 years   On 8 February 2024, the Commission adopted its revised Notice on the definition of the relevant market for the purposes of Union competition law. The aim of the revision is to enhance transparency and legal certainty for businesses, contribute to a more efficient competition enforcement, and ensure that the content of the Notice is adapted to market developments that have occurred since the original text of the Notice was adopted more than 20 years ago in 1997.    The process of revising the Notice began in 2020, and the overall conclusion was that the Notice was still generally fit for purpose but needed to be updated with regard to new market realities, new practices, and case law.   The revised version of the Notice includes several new key elements to the original text including an expanded and more accessible guidance on market definition in general but also in relation to digital markets, a recognition of the importance of non-price parameters (innovation, sustainability etc.). Further, the revised Notice includes expanded guidance on geographic market definition focusing (e.g. on the role of imports).   Read the revised Notice: https://lnkd.in/dHMEzcSB     Read the Commissions press release: https://lnkd.in/dCfHWpCJ   #competition #marketdefinition #CommissionNotice 

#Competition #DigitalMarkets   Last week the International Center for Law & Economics submitted comments (prepared by Geoffrey Manne, Dirk Auer, Lazar Radic, and yours truly) in response to the 🇬🇧 Competition and Markets Authority's invitation to comment on its draft guidance for the digital-markets competition regime. As you know, we do not favor ex-ante regulation of digital markets --because we think Competition Law is the better tool to intervene when *we know* that specific business conduct is indeed harming competition--, but they are the lay of the land now in some jurisdictions. UK’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (DMCC) is somehow better than regulations like the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA). It includes, for instance, a "countervailing benefits exemption". That means some obligations or prohibitions could be exempted if they create benefits to consumers that outweigh harm to competition. Also, the DMCC does not dispense with the market-power requirement which is a good filter to intervene in those cases where a firm is indeed capable of harming competition. Still, the DMCC gives to the CMA vast new powers and discretion to “shape” digital markets. In many respects, the draft guidance limits discretion and provides predictability to economic agents, and the CMA is to be commended for its thoughtful approach. Our comments suggest some changes that could help the CMA enforce the DMCC in a way consistent with sound legal and economic principles, avoiding as much as possible hindering procompetitive behavior or business models. Link to the full text in the comments.

The UK has finally adopted its long-awaited legislation establishing a new pro-competition regime for digital markets. To discuss the main features of the Digital Markets Competition and Consumers Act we organised a panel ( 📹 https://lnkd.in/e-su58-9) with three remarkable participants. Lara Dimitrova Stoimenova – Managing Director of Sigma Economics (ex-Ofcom & CMA) Sarah Long – Partner at Euclid Law Firm Max von Thun-Hohenstein Yoshioka – Director of Europe & Transatlantic Partnerships at the Open Markets Institute Among the topics receiving attention of the speakers are the following: ✔ Open-endedness of goals: bug or feature? ✔ Comparing legislative processes in the EU (the DMA) & the UK (the DMCCA) ✔ The CMA consultation on new digital markets competition guidance ✔ Is the requirement of having so many mandatory consultations good or bad for a new regime? ✔ What potential implications should the CMA be mindful of when consulting on the new guidance bearing in mind the life of Art 102 Guidance Paper ✔ Formally, unlike the DMA, the DMCCA is not a new start but a continuation of competition policy: implications ✔ The elegance of the formula "the CMA [...] will apply this guidance flexibly and may depart from the approach described where there is an appropriate and reasonable justification for doing so" ✔ The level of judicial scrutiny and the role of judicial authorities in the new architecture. ✔ Discussing (the relationship between the) two autonomous procedures: "Conduct Requirements" & "Pro-Competition Interventions" ✔ Changes in merger control ✔ Final offer mechanism (DMCCA) vs. FRAND terms (DMA) ✔ Recommendations to students New video 🎬 https://lnkd.in/e-su58-9 Previous 66th episode has been published last Tuesday featuring Filomena Chirico: The Digital Markets Act: From Strategy & Vision to First Non-Compliance Cases – https://lnkd.in/e76T5MwY Next 68th episode will be released next Tuesday. We will offer an interview with Prof. Damien Gérard, Prosecutor General of the Belgian Competition Authority. A chronological list of all 67 episodes is available in the first comment to the video.

In May 2024, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published its draft guidance for the digital markets competition regime, as established by the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (the Act). In response to the public consultation, RBB submitted a reply setting out a number of observations. We acknowledge that the Act has the potential to deliver meaningful benefits to competition in the digital space. Moreover, the CMA’s commitment to adopting an evidence-based approach is welcome. However, implementation is not without risk. It has the potential to impose a significant regulatory burden on firms and to chill competition and innovation, to the detriment of consumers. The draft guidance exacerbates these risks by creating considerable uncertainty as to which firms and activities will be captured by regulation and failing to acknowledge that there is a well-recognised process for assessing substantial market power that can (and should) apply in respect of digital markets. We urge the CMA to provide more clarity, in line with established economic principles, to resolve these issues. Read RBB's response here: https://lnkd.in/evTMujd8 #CompetitionLaw #CompetitionPolicy #DigitalCompetition #RBBEconomics

The road to adopting the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act was neither the shortest nor the easiest – but finally to the delight of all (quite heterogeneous) groups of the supporters of a new pro-competition approach to shaping digital markets, the legislation has been passed. One of the most active roles in the entire process has been played by the House of Lords, and one of the most engaged and knowledgeable contributors to the co-legislative process was Lord Clement-Jones. As colleagues know, together with Prof. Rupprecht Podszun, Dr Jasper van den Boom and Sarah Hinck I have a privilege to conduct a comparative research project "Shaping Competition in the Digital Age" (focusing on the EU, Germany and the UK). Among various activities, we also have a blog offering original specialised content focusing on the substance of the reforms within the Digital Markets Act; Gesetz gegen Wettbewerbsbeschränkungen; and the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act regimes. Within this research initiative, I just had a pleasure to ask Lord Clement-Jones some questions related to the adoption, implementation, juristic elegance and also eventual pitfalls of the new UK legislation. 💬 https://lnkd.in/eMns3teQ The answers are really informative and thought-provoking. I hope –and I'm sure – those interested in a real comparative analysis, looking at the new law beyond headlines and beyond their own business models, will find these answers really inspirational. We have published already quite a few carefully prepared posts and have much more in the pipeline (and we soon will be expanding our research team), so we invite all interested in the evolution and comparative analysis of these new regimes to subscribe to our newsletter. https://scidaproject.com/ Tim Clement-Jones Rupprecht Podszun Jasper van den Boom Sarah Hinck

As already posted on LinkedIn by Virginia Passalacqua the book 'Balancing Unity and Diversity in EU Legislation' edited by Ton Van Den Brink and Virginia Passalacqua is now out! I am grateful for having been able to contribute to this book by writing the Chapter on Recent Trends in EU internal market legislation. This chapter revisits the concept of the internal market and the role of EU legislative harmonisation therein in the light of a number of challenges and developments, including the digital and green transitions of our society. The view that legislative harmonisation would mostly focus on the elimination of trade barriers no longer holds. The internal market has been increasingly used as a powerful instrument to regulate public interests and fundamental rights, echoing Spaak's words from 1956 and now Enrico Letta's report on the Future of the Single Market: https://lnkd.in/g6FSGQkh Many thanks Ton and Virginia for having taken on the task to edit such a rich and insightful book, with contributions by Ton Van Den Brink, Virginia Passalacqua, Gunnar Thor Petursson, Xavier Groussot, Salvo Nicolosi, Cristina Fasone, Bram Duivenvoorde, Jan Biemans, Matteo Gargantini, Małgorzata Kozak, Willem A. Janssen, Vincent Delhomme, Dorin-Ciprian Grumaz & Pauline Phoa. https://lnkd.in/g9WWuACa