Talk:Venezuela (January 13, 1992)

From AntitrustWorldWiki
Revision as of 12:09, 24 July 2007 by AchalOza (talk | contribs) (New page: == Venezuela 1992 3rd Party Initiation == ''The first part of Art. 32 seems to allow 3rd party initiation, however the second part seems to not allow it. What do you think? Perhaps the ...)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Venezuela 1992 3rd Party Initiation

The first part of Art. 32 seems to allow 3rd party initiation, however the second part seems to not allow it. What do you think? Perhaps the 3rd party can only "report" a violation?

Article 32

"Proceedings shall be initiated at the request of a concerned party or at the initiative of the Office.

"The initiation of proceedings may be ordered only by the Superintendent.

"Whenever it appears that the rules provided for in this Law may have been violated, the Superintendent will order the opening qf the corresponding proceeding, and shall initiate through the Tribunal the investigation of the case when appropriate."

--AchalOza 13:00, 19 July 2007 (EDT)

Hylton: yes, code this as 3rd party initiation. It is close enough, it basically allows a 3rd party to initiate and the Superintendent oversees the process to make sure it's valid. --AchalOza 10:21, 23 July 2007 (EDT)

Venezuela 1992 Divestiture

Does this imply divestiture?

Article 35: During the hearing of the case file, and before its decision is handed down, the office Superintendent may adopt the following preventive measures:

1º It may order the alleged prohibited practice to cease; and

Dictate measures to avoid damages that may result from the alleged prohibited practice.

--AchalOza 13:27, 19 July 2007 (EDT)

Hylton: no, that's not enough for divestiture. --AchalOza 20:28, 23 July 2007 (EDT)