نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق بین‌الملل، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار، دانشکدۀ حقوق، دانشگاه پیام‌نور، ایران

چکیده

در عصر جهانی شدن و درهم‌تنیده شدن حوزه‌های مختلف فرهنگی، اقتصادی، سیاسی و اجتماعی ارتباط میان افراد و کشورها نیز گسترده‌تر و نزدیک‌تر می‌شود. این نزدیکی در روابط به‌خصوص در حوزه‌های اقتصادی، سبب برخورد، تقابل و تعارض قوانین کشورها می‌شود؛ قوانینی که اعمال آنها بر منافع کشورها گره خورده است. گاهی این منافع در خارج از مرزهای یک کشور واقع شده‌اند. اعمال قوانین بر مسائلی که در خارج از مرزهای یک کشور قرار دارد، با موانع فراوانی روبه‌روست. جدای از تعارض حوزه‌های قضایی دو یا چند کشور، حاکمیت کشورها از موانعی است که از اعمال قانون یک کشور در کشوری دیگر جلوگیری می‌کند. از طرفی قوانینی مانند قوانین رقابت که با حوزه‌های اصلی منافع اقتصادی و نظم عمومی و اقتصادی یک کشور گره خورده است، از چنان اهمیتی برخوردارند که اگر در خارج مرزها نقض شوند، دولت‌ها به‌سادگی از آن نخواهند گذشت. در این نوشتار با روش تحلیلی، توصیفی و تطبیقی رویۀ اتحادیۀ اروپایی در اعمال فراسرزمینی حقوق رقابت در محدودۀ حاکمیت دولت‌ها در جلوگیری از اعمال فراسرزمینی قوانین این قانون، نحوۀ صدور رأی و آثار مترتب بر آن و همچنین چگونگی اجرای آنها بررسی می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Extraterritorial Application of European Competition Law

نویسندگان [English]

  • Farhad Bagheri 1
  • Masoud Alizadeh 2

1 Ph.D. Student in International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Shahid Beheshti, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Prof., Faculty of Law, University of Payame Noor, Garmsar, Iran

چکیده [English]

During globalization era and interconnection of cultural, economic, political and social areas, the connection between people of the world and their countries is becoming vaster and also closer. Such proximity, particularly, in economic areas may cause collision, opposition and conflict of laws of the States. The laws which their application has been knotted to countries interests. Occasionally these interests are beyond the borders of a country. Applying municipal law to the matter which is beyond the border of a country faces many obstacles. Apart from conflict of jurisdictions, the sovereignty of states is one of the obstacles which prevent to enforcement of the law of one country in another country. On the other hand, rules such as competition one which has been knotted to public and economic order of the countries, enjoy such importance which if been violated beyond their borders, they wouldn’t bear this easily. In this paper, through an analytical-descriptive and comparative approach, the European Union's precedent to extraterritorial enforcement of competition law within the limits of sovereignty of States in preventing extra-territorial enforcement of the rules of this law and also how to pass a sentence and its effects, as well as how they implement is being examined.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • European Union
  • Sovereignty
  • Competition law
  • Extraterritorial Approach
  • Precedent
  • Domain of Law

. فارسی

 

  1. کدخدایی، عباسعلی (1381). ساختار و حقوق اتحادیۀ اروپایی، تهران: میزان.

 

2.انگلیسی

  1. Books

 

  1. Clarke, Julie, (2014). international merger policy: applying domestic law to international markets, Edwar Elgar publishing.
  2. Dabbah Maher, (2016). m., international and competition law, Cambridge university press (2010). Frenz, Walter, handbook of EU competition law, springer.
  3. Ezrachi, Ariel, (2016). Research handbook on international competition law, Edwar Elgar publishing.
  4. Guzman, Andrew, (2011). cooperation, comity and competition policy, oxford university press.
  5. Ismail, Mohammed A.M., (2016). globalization and new international public works agreements in developing countries: an analytical perspective, Routledge.
  6. Jones Alison, Brenda Sufrin, (2016). EU competition law, cases, texts and materials, oxford university press.
  7. Lorenz, Moritz, (2013). an introduction to European Union competition law, Cambridge University press.
  8. Natalino, Ronzitti, (2016). Sanctions and international law, Martinus Nijhoff publisher.
  9. Rodger, Barry J., Macculloch, Angus, Competition Law, Cavendish publishing, 2001.
  10. Schutze, Robert, (2012). an introduction to European Union law, Cambridge University press.
  11. Van themaat, Weijer verloren van, Reuder, Berend, (2014). European competition law: a case commentary, Edwar Elgar publishing.
  12. Weatherill, Stephen, (2006). EU law: cases. Texts and materials, oxford university press.
  13. Whish, Richard, bailey, David, (2012). Competition law, oxford university press.

 

B) Articles

  1. Ghodoosi, Farshad, (2015). the sanction theory: a frail paradigm for international law, Harvard International Law Journal Online.
  2. Jennings, Richard, (1957). extraterritorial jurisdiction and the United States of America antitrust laws, British year book of international law.
  3. Lento, Christopher J.(2014). shifting sands: an analysis of OPEC under US antitrust and EU competition law and how the US oil boom might change it all, LSU journal of energy Law and Resources, volume 2, issue 2,
  4. Sato, Chie,(2010). extraterritoriality application of EU competition law: is it possible for Japanese companies to steer clear of EU competition law? , journal of political science and sociology, no. 11

C) Internet Resources

  1. Eeas.europe.eu/topics/sanctions-policy/423/sanctions-policy-en
  2. Fortune.com/2016/08/30/apple-tax-Ireland-ruling
  3. Geradin, Damien, The EU Competition Law Fining System: A Reassessment, power point, 2011, Covington and Burling LLP, slide 5
  4. Guideline on the effect on trade concept contained in article 81 and 82 of the treaty, 2004/C/101/07, OJ C 101/81
  5. Www.ft.com/cms/apple’s-EU-tax-Dispute-Explainedتاریخ رجوع: 7 اوت 2016

D) Case law

  1. Barcelona traction case, ICJ, 1970
  2. Case 26/26 [1963] ECR,
  3. Case 43/75 [1976] ECR 455
  4. Case 48/69 ICI v commission, 1972, ECR, 619;
  5. Case 489/11 p and c- 498/11p, Siemens AG, Mitsubishi electric corp. and Toshiba corp. v. commission
  6. Case 52/69 Geigy v commission, 1972 ECR 787;
  7. Case 53/69 Sandoz v commission. 1972, ECR 845.
  8. Case c-235/92 [1999] ECR-I 362
  9. Case costa v. Enel 6/64 [1964] ECR 585,
  10. Case T-102/96 Gencor v commission, 1999 ECR II- 752
  11. Joined cases c- 239/11 p,
  12. LOTUS case, PCIJ, 1927