Denmark August 2005
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Score = 22
Governed by: Consolidated Competition Act No. 785 of 8. August 2005 (hereinafter referred to as “Competition Act”). [1]
| Category | Subcategory | Score | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope | Extraterritoriality | 1 | It is not expressly stated in the Competition Act but it is applicable to anything that has an effect on the Danish territory.[2] |
| Remedies | Fines | 1 | §23 allows fines to be imposed on anybody who infringes certain sections of the Competition Act. |
| Prison Sentences | 0 | ||
| Divestitures | 1 | § 12(g) | |
| Private Enforcement | 3rd Party Initiation | 1 | 3rd parties can invoke §6, and 11 in Danish court directly without involving the Konkurrencerådet. |
| Remedies Available to 3rd Parties | 1 | 3rd parties can invoke §6, and 11 in Danish court directly without involving the Konkurrencerådet. | |
| 3rd Party Rights in Proceedings | 1 | §19(2)(ii) allows 3rd parties who have an individual and substantial interest in the case to participate in the proceedings and to appeal a decision of the Konkurrencerådet. | |
| Merger Notification | Voluntary | 0 | |
| Mandatory | 3 | §12b(1) requires notification of a merger within 1 week of the conclusion of the agreement. | |
| Pre-merger | 2 | §12b(1) requires notification of a merger within 1 week of the conclusion of the agreement or announcement of the merger. | |
| Post-merger | 0 | ||
| Merger Assessment | Dominance | 1 | §12(c)(2) lists the creation of a dominant position that would restrict competition as the sole reason for disallowing a merger. |
| Restriction of Competition | 1 | §12(c)(2) lists the creation of a dominant position that would restrict competition as the sole reason for disallowing a merger. | |
| Public Interest (Pro D) | 0 | ||
| Public Interest (Pro Authority) | 0 | ||
| Other | 0 | ||
| Efficiency | 0 | ||
| Dominance | Limits Access | 1 | §11(3)(ii) lists limiting production and markets as a prohibited abuse. |
| Abusive Acts | 1 | §11(1) prohibits any abuse by an undertaking of a dominant position. | |
| Price Setting | 1 | §11(3)(i) lists price setting as an example of an abusive act. | |
| Discriminatory Pricing | 1 | §11(3)(iii) lists applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions as an abusive act. | |
| Resale Price Maintenance | 1 | §7(2)(i) prohibits RPM and exempts it from the usual defenses for anticompetitive practices. Also see, §6(2)(vii). | |
| Obstacles to Entry | 0 | ||
| Efficiency Defense | 0 | ||
| Restrictive Trade Practices | Price Fixing | 1 | §6(2)(i) prohibits price fixing. |
| Tying | 1 | §§ 11(3)(iv) and 6(2)(v) both prohibit tying arrangements. | |
| Market Division | 0 | ||
| Output Restraint | 1 | §6(2)(ii) prohibits limiting production. | |
| Market Sharing | 1 | §6(2)(iii) prohibits market sharing. | |
| Eliminating Competitors | 0 | ||
| Collusive Tendering/Bid-Rigging | 1 | §7(2)(ii) prohibits collusive tendering and exempts it from the usual defenses for anticompetitive practices. | |
| Supply Refusal | 0 | ||
| Efficiency Defense | 1 | §8(1)(i) makes an exception to §6 for agreements that contribute to improving the efficiency of production or distribution of goods. |
References
- ↑ Danish Competition Authority, http://www.ks.dk/english/competition/legislation/consolidated-act-no-785-of-8-august-2005/
- ↑ Competition Law in the EU, at 471