Advanced

Möjligheten till eftergift av konkurrensskadeavgift i kartellärenden

Brunnström, Fredrika LU (2017) HARH01 20162
Department of Business Law
Abstract
Abstract

Within competition law, cartels are defined as a very serious and infringement and are prohibited. This ban exists both within EU law and in Swedish law and looks largely the same. As the EU has developed their program to combat cartels, Sweden has been affected to have a more harmonized EU system when it comes to combating these types of anti-competitive collaborations. Leniency systems have emerged in Europe as well as in Sweden and they are based on the principle that a member of a cartel might act as "whistle-blower" and uncover the cooperation with the aim of avoiding fines and go free from punishment. Only one company in the cartel can obtain full immunity, and it must thus be the first to report infringement to the... (More)
Abstract

Within competition law, cartels are defined as a very serious and infringement and are prohibited. This ban exists both within EU law and in Swedish law and looks largely the same. As the EU has developed their program to combat cartels, Sweden has been affected to have a more harmonized EU system when it comes to combating these types of anti-competitive collaborations. Leniency systems have emerged in Europe as well as in Sweden and they are based on the principle that a member of a cartel might act as "whistle-blower" and uncover the cooperation with the aim of avoiding fines and go free from punishment. Only one company in the cartel can obtain full immunity, and it must thus be the first to report infringement to the Competition Authority. It is also possible to have reduction of fines and a ticket system has been developed by ECN (European Competition Network) which has not been adopted in Swedish law.
Our current Competition Act adopted in 2008 contains provisions for leniency which were introduced in Swedish law in a former act from 2002. It has since emerged mainly one significant case in Sweden where the question of immunity has become important, but this case was tried under the former Competition Act of 1993. It is thus uncertain whether our Swedish leniency system is effective or not, and if companies are discouraged to participate in cartels when a member at any time can pull the handbrake, reveal cooperation and obtain immunity from fines.
Since the Swedish system is more and more becoming EU harmonized and based on EU case-law and practices, which are more developed, the EU development has to be taken into consideration when considering the leniency model in Swedish law.
This study focuses on illustrating how the Swedish and EU legal system for the leniency looks and the problem that is presumed to exist regarding the efficacy in Swedish law. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Sammanfattning

Inom konkurrensrätten är kartellbildning väldigt allvarligt och det finns därför ett förbud mot detta vilket är konkurrenslagstiftningens allra viktigaste bestämmelse. Stadgandet finns dels inom EU-rätten, dels i svensk rätt och de ser i stora drag likadana ut. I takt med att EU utvecklat sitt program för att bekämpa kartellbildning har Sverige påverkats att ha ett mer EU-harmoniserat system när det kommer till bekämpandet av dessa typer av konkurrensbegränsande samarbeten. Det finns numera därför en möjlighet att få eftergift av konkurrensskadeavgift. Eftergiftssystemet har vuxit fram inom EU såväl som Sverige och bygger på principen att en medlem i en kartell kan tänkas agera ”whistle-blower” och avslöja samarbetet med... (More)
Sammanfattning

Inom konkurrensrätten är kartellbildning väldigt allvarligt och det finns därför ett förbud mot detta vilket är konkurrenslagstiftningens allra viktigaste bestämmelse. Stadgandet finns dels inom EU-rätten, dels i svensk rätt och de ser i stora drag likadana ut. I takt med att EU utvecklat sitt program för att bekämpa kartellbildning har Sverige påverkats att ha ett mer EU-harmoniserat system när det kommer till bekämpandet av dessa typer av konkurrensbegränsande samarbeten. Det finns numera därför en möjlighet att få eftergift av konkurrensskadeavgift. Eftergiftssystemet har vuxit fram inom EU såväl som Sverige och bygger på principen att en medlem i en kartell kan tänkas agera ”whistle-blower” och avslöja samarbetet med syftet att själv slippa böter och gå helt fri från straff. Enbart ett företag i kartellen kan få full eftergift och det gäller därmed att vara det första företaget som anmäler överträdelsen till Konkurrensverket. Det finns även möjlighet till nedsättning av konkurrensskadeavgift och ett kölappssystem enligt ECN (European Competition Network) vilket inte antagits i svensk rätt.
Vår nuvarande Konkurrenslag tillkom 2008 och innehåller bestämmelserna om eftergift som infördes i svensk rätt 2002. Det har sedan dess uppkommit främst ett betydande mål i Sverige där frågan om eftergift blivit aktuell, men som avgjordes enligt den tidigare Konkurrenslagen från 1993. Det råder därmed osäkerhet om huruvida vårt svenska eftergiftssystem är effektivt eller inte samt om företag blir avskräckta att delta i karteller när en medlem när som helst kan dra i handbromsen, avslöja samarbetet och själv erhålla bötesimmunitet.
Eftersom det svenska systemet mer och mer blir EU-harmoniserat blir EU-rättslig praxis, som kommit längre fram i utvecklingen i kartellärenden, aktuellt att beakta då det EU-rättsliga systemet anses vara en förebild för svensk rätt.
Den här studien fokuserar på att belysa hur det svenska och EU-rättsliga systemet för eftergift ser ut och fungerar samt hur effektivt det svenska systemet kan antas vara i brist på tillräcklig svensk rättspraxis. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Brunnström, Fredrika LU
supervisor
organization
course
HARH01 20162
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
The Leniency system, Eftergiftssystemet, Eftergift, Kartell, Competition Law, EU, Konkurrenslag.
language
Swedish
id
8900026
date added to LUP
2017-01-20 09:56:12
date last changed
2017-01-20 09:56:12
@misc{8900026,
  abstract     = {Abstract 

Within competition law, cartels are defined as a very serious and infringement and are prohibited. This ban exists both within EU law and in Swedish law and looks largely the same. As the EU has developed their program to combat cartels, Sweden has been affected to have a more harmonized EU system when it comes to combating these types of anti-competitive collaborations. Leniency systems have emerged in Europe as well as in Sweden and they are based on the principle that a member of a cartel might act as "whistle-blower" and uncover the cooperation with the aim of avoiding fines and go free from punishment. Only one company in the cartel can obtain full immunity, and it must thus be the first to report infringement to the Competition Authority. It is also possible to have reduction of fines and a ticket system has been developed by ECN (European Competition Network) which has not been adopted in Swedish law.
Our current Competition Act adopted in 2008 contains provisions for leniency which were introduced in Swedish law in a former act from 2002. It has since emerged mainly one significant case in Sweden where the question of immunity has become important, but this case was tried under the former Competition Act of 1993. It is thus uncertain whether our Swedish leniency system is effective or not, and if companies are discouraged to participate in cartels when a member at any time can pull the handbrake, reveal cooperation and obtain immunity from fines.
Since the Swedish system is more and more becoming EU harmonized and based on EU case-law and practices, which are more developed, the EU development has to be taken into consideration when considering the leniency model in Swedish law.
This study focuses on illustrating how the Swedish and EU legal system for the leniency looks and the problem that is presumed to exist regarding the efficacy in Swedish law.},
  author       = {Brunnström, Fredrika},
  keyword      = {The Leniency system,Eftergiftssystemet,Eftergift,Kartell,Competition Law,EU,Konkurrenslag.},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Möjligheten till eftergift av konkurrensskadeavgift i kartellärenden},
  year         = {2017},
}