Program
Registration
8:00INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
08.45Frédéric JENNY | Chairman, OECD Competition Committee | President, Concurrences Review International Committee | Professor, Co-Director - CEDE, ESSEC, Paris (bio)
#1 LABOUR AND COMPETITION: NON-POACHING AGREEMENTS, STATUS OF PLATFORM WORKERS: WHAT ARE THE RISKS?
09.30Today, the DOJ’s intention in non-poaching agreements is not only to consider wage-fixing and non-dealing behaviour as per se illegal, but to prosecute it criminally. However, this position is questionable, particularly in light of some recent decisions in criminal cases where juries have not taken the same position and have decided to acquit targets of such charges (e.g. (U.S. v. DaVita, Inc., Case). In the European Union, the debate is not as advanced as no decision has yet been adopted. Only the Portuguese Competition Authority has issued its first statement of objections against an anti-competitive labour market agreement. In addition, the European Commission is currently working on a legislative proposal to improve the working conditions of platform workers considered as precarious. This includes the lack of transparency and predictability of contractual arrangements.
Elvira ALIENDE RODRIGUEZ | Partner, Shearman & Sterling, Brussels (bio)
Jee-Yeon LEHMANN | Managing Principal, Analysis Group, Boston (bio)
Stanislas MARTIN | Rapporteur-General, Autorité de la concurrence, Paris (bio)
Martijn SNOEP | President, Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets, The Hague (bio)
Moderator: Frédéric JENNY | Chairman, OECD Competition Committee, Paris | Professor, Co-Director - CEDE, ESSEC, Paris (bio)
Coffee break
11:00#2 COMPETITION LAW AND SCIENTIFIC EXPERTISE: WHERE ARE THE EXPERTS?
11.30There are an increasing number of situations in which competition authorities are forced to interpret a text or practice that does not fall under competition law. In order to solve a legal problem, the authority is thus obliged to interpret a scientific statement. However, this raises the question of the limits of this practice: how far can the authorities go in interpreting these statements? What degree of freedom do the authorities have with regard to these regulatory, administrative decisions?
Gönenç GÜRKAYNAK | Partner, Elig Gürkaynak Attorneys-at-Law, Istanbul (bio)
Yann GUTHMANN | Head of Digital Economy Unit, Autorité de la concurrence, Paris (bio)
Pierre RÉGIBEAU | Chief Competition Economist, DG COMP, Brussels (bio)
David SEVY | Executive Vice President, Compass Lexecon, Paris (bio)
Moderator: Mélanie THILL-TAYARA | Partner, Dechert, Paris (bio)
Lunch
13:00#3 EXCLUSIONARY ABUSE: WHAT ARE THE NCAs AND COURTS’ RECENT TRENDS?
14.30Exclusionary abuses consist of preventing or excluding a competitor from entering the market. This is mainly characterized by an abuse of a dominant position. It therefore allows the company to charge excessive prices, which is considered an abuse of dominance under Article 102. In the Google Shopping case, the Commission considered that the conduct complained of would allow Google to foreclose the development of competing applications and operating systems. Indeed, Google’s algorithm downgraded the visibility of product comparison sites. How does the case law deal with this concept in the light of current market situations?
Irene DE ANGELIS | Director, Antitrust Affairs, Intesa Sanpaolo, Milano (bio)
Frédéric DE BURE | Partner, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, Paris (bio)
Benoit DURAND | Partner, RBB Economics, Brussels (bio)
Andreas MUNDT | President, Bundeskartellamt, Bonn (bio)
Moderator: Ian FORRESTER | Former Judge, General Court of the EU, Luxembourg (bio)
Coffee break
16:00#4 PROOF AND EVIDENCE: DOES THE DIVERSITY OF REGIMES CREATE INEQUALITY?
16.30US competition law is market-oriented and gives considerable space to the economic approach to competition. The US system applies the rule of reason which can be simplified or accelerated. This means that behaviour can be considered anti-competitive before a full economic analysis is carried out. Enforcement agencies engage in varying degrees of scrutiny on a sliding scale that is determined by the elements necessary to determine that conduct is anticompetitive. In contrast, EU competition law advocates competitive balance and the primacy of the legal over the economic. Thus, European courts appear to have developed a structured approach, based on cumulative criteria, which is distinct from the simple factual analysis used in the US. Do these regimes have the effect of creating a form of asymmetry, of inequality of arms before the judge?
Raphaël DE CONINCK | Vice President, CRA, Brussels (bio)
Luc GYSELEN | Partner, Arnold & Porter, Brussels (bio)
Paul NIHOUL | Judge, General Court of the EU, Luxembourg | Professor of Law, UC Louvain, Brussels (bio)
Ioannis LIANOS | President, Hellenic Competition Commission | Professor of Global Competition Law and Public Policy, Faculty of Laws, University College London (on leave) (bio)
Moderator: Anne-Sophie CHONE-GRIMALDI | Professor, University Paris Nanterre (bio)
Reception
19:00Previous attendees
Agencies: US Federal Trade Commission, UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, UK Competition and Markets Authority, Turkish Competition Authority, Tribunal de Defensa de la Libre Competencia, The Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court of Thailand, Taiwan Fair Trade Commission, Swiss Competition Commission, Superintendencia de Competencia, Spanish Competition Authority, Salvadorian Competition Authority, Portugal Permanent Representation to the EU, Peruvian National Institute for Competition and Intellectual Property, Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, OECD, National Communications Authority, Ministry of Finance of Thailand, Ministere de l’Économie de France, Malaysia Competition Commission, Italian Competition Authority, Hungary Permanent Representation to the EU, Hungarian Competition Authority, German Permanent Representation, General Court of the EU, French Treasury, Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority, FCCPC, European Commission, European Banking Authority, EFTA Surveillance Authority, Ecuadorian Competition Authority, DGCCRF, DG Trésor, DG COMP, Department of Communications and Digital Technologies, Croatian Competition Agency, CPC, Court of Justice of the European Union, Council of State, Conseil Superieur de l’Audiovisuel, Competition Council of Lithuania, Competition Authority of Kenya, COFECE, Bundeskartellamt, Belgian Competition Authority, Autorité de la concurrence, etc.
Corporations: Servier, Scope, Sanden International, Samsung, Safran, Rolls Royce, Richemont International, R4l, Qlik, Pfizer, Österreichsiche Post, OCP, Nokia, News Corp, Netflix, Nestlé, Natura Bissé International, Msc Mediterranean Shipping Company, Mastercard, Lyondellbasell, LVMH, Louis Dreyfus Company, Liberty Global, Levi Strauss & Co., La Banque Postale, L’oréal, Is Bank, Intesa Sanpaolo, International Airlines Group, Inter Cars, Infobip, Imperial Chemical Industries (Trading As Ici Paints Akzonobel), Imerys, Iata, Honeywell, Groupement Des Cartes Bancaires, Groupe Monnoyeur, Groupe Canal+, Genesis Pharma, Genc, GE Renewable Energy, Fortum, Flügger Group, Ferrero, Europcar Mobility Group, ESB, Ericsson, Epex Spot, Engie, Enerjisa, Enel, E.On, Elanco, Edreams Odigeo, Eba Clearing, DPDHL, Deutsche Post / DHL, Delivery Hero, Dassaultsystemes, Credit Agricole, Colgate Palmolive, CNPA, Chanel, Centrient Pharmaceuticals, Capgemini, Cacib, British American Tobacco, BNP Paribas, Bhel, Bertelsmann, BBVA, Bayer, Bauer Media Group, Avril, Audemars Piguet, Arcelormittal, Apple, Anglo American, Amazon, Amadeus ITG, Akzonobel, Air Liquide, Abbott Laboratories, 3ds, etc.
Law firms: Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Wilmerhale, Willkie Farr & Gallagher, White & Case, Weil Gotshal & Manges, Webber Wentzel, Watson Farley & Williams, Vilgerts, Viguié Schmidt & Associés, Van Bael & Bellis, Vallette Viallard Avocats, Uria Menendez Abogados, Tozzinifreire Advogados, Taylor Wessing, Suciu Popa & Associates, Stoica & Asociatii, Stibbe, Steptoe & Johnson, Stephenson Harwood, Skadden, Simmonscooper Partners, Simmons & Simmons, Sidley Austin, Sheppard Mullin, Shearn Delamore, Shearman & Sterling, Sense Avocats, Roschier Attorneys, Reed Smith, Quinn Emanuel, Quevedo Abogados, Popovici Nitu Stoica & Asociatii, Pokorny, Wagner & Partners, PLMJ, Pinsent Masons, Havel & Partners, Greenberg Traurig, Gowling Wlg, Gonzalez Calvillo, Gómez Acebo & Pombo, Gide Loyrette Nouel, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Gattai, Minoli, Agostinelli & Partners, Gate Avocats, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Fréget Glaser & Associés, Flint, Flinn, Figueiredo E Velloso Advogados, Fieldfisher, Fidal, EY Law, Eversheds Sutherland, Euclid Law, Erdem Erdem Avukatlik Ortakligi, Ellex Valiunas, Eisenberger & Herzog, DLA Piper, Dittmar & Indrenius Attorneys, Dimitrova & Partners Law Firm, Dickson Minto, Dentons, Demarest, Deloitte Legal, Delcade Avocats & Solicitors, Dechert, Debevoise & Plimpton, De Dios & Goyena, DC Legal, Davis Polk & Wardwell, D.K. Avgitidis & Associates Law Firm, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, Crowell & Moring, CRD Avocats, Covington & Burling, Collyer Bristow, Cobalt Legal, Clifford Chance, Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr, Cleary Gottlieb, Cechová & Partners, Cabinet Borrel, Cabinet Bensimhon, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner, Brodies, Bredin Prat, Bowmans, Borenius Attorneys, Bona Law, Bird & Bird, Binder Grösswang, Bdgs Associes, Bctg Avocats, Bclp, Barnert Egermann Illigasch, Baker Mckenzie, Bahas, Gramatidis & Partners, Avonhurst, Attis Legal, Atlas Law Partners, Ashurst, Arnold & Porter, Ari Law Firm, Alston & Bird, Allende & Brea, Allen & Overy, Advokatfirman Vinge, Advokatfirman Delphi, Advokatfirmaet Pwc, A&L Goodbody, A. Scarante & Partners Law Firm etc.
Economic Consultancies: The Brattle Group, Tabe Consulting, Saga Economics, RBB Economics, Positive Competition, Oxera Consulting, MAPP Economics, KPMG, Itam, GMT Economics, Gidari, Genesis Analytics, FTI Consulting, Frontier Economics, Flint Global, Cornerstone Research, Copenhagen Economics, Compass Lexecon, Charles River Associates (CRA), Berkeley Research Group, Analysis Group, Alvarez & Marsal, etc.
Cancellation policy
Concurrences reserves the right to cancel or reschedule the event due to Covid-19 situation or any other circumstances. If the event is cancelled or postponed and you are unable to attend the rescheduled event, Concurrences will refund the fee. Concurrences will not be liable for any damages, costs, losses or expenses of any kind incurred or suffered by you in connection with the modification, postponement or cancellation of the event.
If you would like to read about this event’s topic, you can access the following Concurrences documents. If you do not have access, please inquire for Subscription here.
Panel 1: Labour and Competition: Non-Poaching Agreements, Status of Platform Workers: What Are the Risks?
Panel 2: Competition law and scientific expertise: Where are the experts?
3- Nicolas Charbit, Thomas Moretto, Standing Up for Convergence and Relevance in Antitrust - VOL II, June 2021
Catherine Prieto, Antitrust and Competition Laws, Barry E. HAWK, September 2021
Panel 3: Exclusionary abuse: what are the NCAs and courts’ recent trends?
Panel 4: Proof and evidence: does the diversity of regimes create inequality?
Organizers
The Paris “New Frontiers of Antitrust” conference is a unique occasion to network with some of today’s most influential global leaders in competition law. This conference, held each year in Paris since 2009, now ranks first among the European antitrust independent events in terms of venue, press reports and audience. The 2022 Steering Committee, headed by Frédéric Jenny, includes Prof. Laurence Idot, Prof. Nicolas Petit and Nicolas Charbit. All tariffs include breakfast, coffee, lunch and cocktail reception. Governmental agencies and academics registrations must be sent with valid proof. Languages: English - French (translation). Limited places available due to the conference venue. Payment must be received prior to the conference. There will be no refund after 21 April 2022. Cancellations must be received in writing; cancellations received in writing up to 2 weeks before the conference will receive a refund less 15 %. Substitute delegates are welcome at any time. Photos will be taken at the event; attendees agree for the organizer to use these photos, unless otherwise required in writing. This event is organised by Concurrences Review and is co-sponsored by legal, economic and media partners. The list of attendees will be communicated to the speakers. Conference accredited with CPD credits and credited for the Paris Bar continuing training.
Sponsors
6, rue Galilée
75016 Paris France