Neodyum Miknatis
amateur porn
implant
olabahis
Casino Siteleri
Kayseri escort
canli poker siteleri kolaybet meritslot
escort antalya
istanbul escort
sirinevler escort
antalya eskort bayan
Short Reads

Curaçao Competition Act entered into force on 1 September 2017

Curaçao Competition Act entered into force on 1 September 2017

Curaçao Competition Act entered into force on 1 September 2017

02.10.2017 NL law

On 1 September 2017, the rules of the Curaçao Competition Act (Landsverordening inzake concurrentie, "CCA") entered into force on the basis of a national decree (Landsbesluit) of 11 April 2017. The CCA addresses the three main topics of competition law: cartels, abuse of dominance and mergers. The CCA is largely in line with the Dutch and European competition rules, with a few notable exceptions described below.

Article 3.1 of the CCA follows the cartel prohibition in Dutch and European competition law (Article 6 DCA and Article 101 TFEU), albeit applicable to competition in the Curaçao market or a part thereof. Contractual provisions and agreements that are concluded contrary to the cartel prohibition are null and void. In principle, the cartel prohibition does not apply to agreements which are of minor importance (the "de minimis" exception), i.e. agreements between undertakings whose combined market share does not exceed 30% on any of the relevant markets. At the request of the undertakings concerned, the Fair Trade Authority Curaçao (FTAC) may also grant an (individual) exemption for agreements or practices whose economic and/or technical benefits outweigh their restrictions on competition and pass on a fair share of those benefits to consumers. The de minimis exception and the possibility to request an exemption do not apply to "hardcore" cartel infringements (i.e. agreements between competitors on prices or other sales conditions, "bid rigging" agreements, limitation of production or sales and market sharing).

Article 4.1 of the CCA contains the prohibition to abuse a dominant position. The CCA stipulates that an undertaking always has a dominant position if it has a market share of 60% or more. The FTAC can impose measures on undertakings with a dominant position to prevent abuse.

Pursuant to Article 5.2 of the CCA, a concentration of undertakings (in the meaning of Article 5.1 of the CCA) is subject to notification where (i) the combined worldwide turnover of the parties involved in the previous calendar year exceeded ANG 125 million (approximately EUR 60 million) and (ii) at least two of the parties achieved a turnover in Curaçao of ANG 15 million (approximately EUR 7 million) or more in the previous calendar year. A concentration must also be notified if as a result thereof the parties involved would create or reinforce a market share of 30% or more on any of the relevant markets in Curaçao. The CCA only provides for an obligation to notify and does not contain a system of merger approval. Currently the purpose of these notifications is merely to monitor concentrations and their effects. After a few years the FTAC will reconsider whether to introduce a merger approval system too.

The CCA also contains provisions on the establishment of the FTAC and its investigative powers to observe compliance with the CCA. The FTAC may impose fines up to ANG 1 million (approximately EUR 470,000) or 10% of the annual turnover of the undertaking(s) that infringed competition law. The FTAC may also impose binding instructions or incremental penalty payments if the cartel prohibition is violated or an undertaking abuses its dominant position.

This article was published in the Competition Law Newsletter of October 2017. Other articles in this newsletter:

  1. Court of Justice landmark judgment: Intel's EUR 1.06 billion fine is sent back to the General Court
  2. Court of Justice upholds fine imposed on Philips and LG in the cathode ray tubes cartel
  3. Court of Justice clarifies that a change from sole to joint control requires EU clearance only if the joint venture is "full-function"
  4. Court of Justice provides guidance on examining excessive prices as abuse of a dominant position
  5. District Court of Rotterdam dismisses Vodafone claims of abuse of dominance by KPN

Team

Related news

01.10.2020 NL law
Directors' liability due to competition law infringements by the company

Short Reads - The District Court Noord-Nederland recently allowed the trustees in bankruptcy of Northsea shrimp trading company Heiploeg to recover part of a EUR 27 million cartel fine from a former director. Internationally, the question whether companies can recover competition law fines through civil claims against individuals involved in the competition law infringement, is controversial. The court held, however, that the director’s personal involvement in the infringement amounted to ‘serious mismanagement’, triggering personal liability to pay damages.

Read more

01.10.2020 NL law
EU merger control: Dutch clause to catch future killer acquisitions

Short Reads - Competition Commissioner Vestager presented a sneak peak of her plans for the future of EU merger control on the 30th anniversary of the EU Merger Regulation. The proposed plans include a simplification of the notification procedure and a new approach towards the system of referral to ensure that significant transactions, particularly in the digital and pharmaceutical industries, no longer escape Commission scrutiny.

Read more

07.10.2020 LU law
Luxembourg tax measures on non-cooperative jurisdictions: EU blacklist updated

Articles - On 6 October 2020, the European Union list of non-cooperative jurisdictions (the “EU List") was updated. The changes have an impact on bill of law nº 7547, providing that, as from 1 January 2021, interest or royalties, accrued or paid, should no longer be deductible for tax purposes when the beneficiary is a related enterprise established in a country included in the EU List.

Read more

01.10.2020 NL law
Waiting for the EC: third-party platform bans and RPM still on radar

Short Reads - The results of the European Commission’s evaluation of the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER) call for more clarity and convergence in the interpretation of certain (online) vertical restrictions. However, the Dutch competition authority (the ACM) and the Dutch courts cannot wait for the European Commission’s revised VBER rules to deal with such sales restrictions.

Read more