About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


2024-05 Reports of Cases before the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance 1 (2024)

handle is hein.intyb/rcbjcofi0439 and id is 1 raw text is: Reports of Cases OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL EMILIOU delivered on 21 March 20241 Joined Cases C-611/22 P and C-625/22 P Illumina, Inc. V European Commission (C-611/22 P) and Grail LLC V Illumina, Inc., European Commission (C-625/22 P) (Appeal - Competition - Concentrations between undertakings - Article 22 of Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 - Concentrations that do not have a Community dimension - Referral request from a competition authority not having jurisdiction under national law - Commission decision to examine the concentration - Competence of the Commission - Time limit for submitting the referral request - Obligation to act within a reasonable time - Principle of good administration - Right of defence - Legitimate expectations) I. Introduction 1. Most modern anti-trust laws, both within the European Union and elsewhere, are built on a trifecta of provisions: rules on agreements and concerted practices, rules on unilateral conduct (or abuses of dominance), and rules on merger control. 2. The peculiarity of rules of merger control lies in the fact that, unlike the other two sets of rules, they generally require the competent (administrative and/or judicial) authorities to engage in an ex ante, as opposed to an ex post, form of review: whether a proposed concentration could, if implemented, result in significant harm to effective competition. It is a particularly complex and laborious technical evaluation, 'based not on the application of precise scientific rules but on criteria and principles which are open to question', aimed at 'predicting the effects of the concentration on the structure and competitive dynamics of the markets concerned, taking into consideration the many constantly evolving factors which may impinge on the future development of supply and demand on those markets'.2 1 Original language: English. 2 Opinion of Advocate General Tizzano in Commission v Tetra Laval (C-12/03 P, EU:C:2004:318, point 73). ECLI:EU:C:2024:2641 1