1.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
2.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
3.
Middleton, K. Blackstone’s UK and EC Competition Documents. 6th ed. 2009.
4.
Bishop, Simon, Walker, Mike. The economics of EC competition law: concepts, application and measurement. 3rd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2010.
5.
Maher M. Dabbah. EC and UK Competition Law: Commentary, Cases and Materials. illustrated edition. Cambridge University Press; 2004.
6.
Gerber, David J. Law and competition in twentieth century Europe: protecting Prometheus [Internet]. [Updated pbk. ed.]. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001. Available from: http://library.kent.ac.uk/cgi-bin/resources.cgi?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199244010.001.0001
7.
Goyder, D. G., Goyder, Joanna, Albors-Llorens, Albertina. Goyder’s EC competition law. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.
8.
Korah, Valentine. An introductory guide to EC competition law and practice. 9th ed. Oxford: Hart Pub; 2007.
9.
Korah, Valentine. Cases and materials on EC competition law. 3rd ed. Oxford: Hart Pub; 2006.
10.
Monti, Giorgio. EC competition law. Vol. Law in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
11.
Slot, Piet Jan, Johnston, Angus. An introduction to competition law. 1st English ed. Oxford: Hart Publishing; 2006.
12.
Bergh, Roger van den, Camesasca, Peter D. European competition law and economics: a comparative perspective. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
13.
Whish, Richard. Competition law. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.
14.
Arnull, Anthony, Wyatt, Derrick. Wyatt & Dashwood’s European Union law. 5th ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
15.
Chalmers, Damian. European Union law: text and materials. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006.
16.
Craig, P. P., De Búrca, G. EU law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.
17.
Steiner, Josephine, Woods, Lorna, Steiner, Josephine. EU law. 10th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.
18.
Europa - European Commission - Competition.
20.
Welcome to the European Parliament.
21.
http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en.
23.
European Court Reports. Available from: databaseName
24.
Common Market Law Reports. Available from: databaseName
25.
European competition law review. Available from: databaseName
26.
Annual Proceedings of the Fordham Law Corporate Institute, International Antitrust.
27.
Law & policy. Available from: databaseName
28.
World competition. Available from: databaseName
29.
Competition Law Review. Available from: databaseName
30.
European competition law review. Available from: databaseName
32.
Common market law review.
33.
Yearbook of European law. Available from: databaseName
34.
Legal issues of European integration. Available from: databaseName
36.
British Institute of International and Comparative Law. International and comparative law quarterly.
37.
European Union. European voice: a weekly view of the Union. Bruxelles: Economist Group;
40.
EurActiv | European Union Information Website (EU and Europe).
41.
International news | euronews, latest international news.
44.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
45.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
47.
Oceans apart. Economist. 2008;387.
48.
The trustbuster’s tools. Economist. 1998;346.
49.
Fox, E. We protect competition; you protect competitors. World competition [Internet]. 2003;26. Available from: databaseName
50.
Fox, E. The new American competition policy - from anti-trust to pro-efficiency. European competition law review [Internet]. 1981; Available from: databaseName
51.
Liesner, J and Glynn, D. Does anti-trust make economic sense? European competition law review [Internet]. 1987; Available from: databaseName
52.
Monti, Giorgio. EC competition law. Vol. Law in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
53.
Bergh, Roger van den, Camesasca, Peter D. European competition law and economics: a comparative perspective. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
54.
Willimsky, S. The concept(s) of competition. European competition law review [Internet]. 1997;1. Available from: databaseName
55.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
56.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
58.
Commission guidelines contained in articles 81 and 82 EC (OJ 2004 C101/81).
59.
Alese, F. The economic theory of non-collusive oligopoly and the concept of concerted practice under art.81. European competition law review [Internet]. 1999;20. Available from: databaseName
60.
Black, O. What is an agreement. European law review. 2003;24.
61.
Brown, C. Bayer v commission: the ECJ agrees. European competition law review [Internet]. 2004;25. Available from: databaseName
62.
Casey, S and Hinchcliffe, S. When is an agreement not an agreement? Implications of the Bayer judgement for parallel trade and contractual dealings with wholesalers and distributors. Business law review (London) [Internet]. 2004;25. Available from: databaseName
63.
Capobianco, A. Information exchange under EC competition law. Common market law review. 2004;41.
64.
Jones, A. Woodpulp: concerted practice and/or conscious parallelism. European competition law review [Internet]. 1993;14. Available from: databaseName
65.
Monti, Giorgio. EC competition law. Vol. Law in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
66.
Odudu, O. Interpreting art.81 (1): object as subjective intention. European law review. 2001;
67.
Odudu, O. Interpreting art.81 (1): the object requirement revisited. European law review. 2001;
68.
Bergh, Roger van den, Camesasca, Peter D. European competition law and economics: a comparative perspective. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
69.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
70.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
72.
Article 1 of Regulation 1/2003 on the implementation of the rules of competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L1/1).
73.
Commission Notice on agreements of minor importance which do not appreciably restrict competition under Article 81 (1) of the Treaty (de minimis) OJ 2001 C368/13.
74.
Commission Regulation (EC) 2790/1999 on the application of Article 81 (3) of the Treaty to category of vertical agreements and concerted practices OJ 1999 L336/21.
75.
Commission Notice Guidelines on vertical restraints OJ 2000 C291/1.
76.
Commission Guidelines on the application of art.81 (3) (OJ 2004 C101/97).
77.
Kjolbye, L. The new Commission guidelines on the application of art.81 (3): an economic approach to art.81. European competition law review [Internet]. 2004;25. Available from: databaseName
78.
Lianos, I. Collusion in vertical relations under art.81 EC. Common market law review. 2008;45.
79.
Lugard, P. Honey, I shrunk the article! A critical assessment of the Commission’s Notice on art.81 (3). European competition law review [Internet]. 2004;25. Available from: databaseName
80.
Monti, Giorgio. EC competition law. Vol. Law in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
81.
Nazzini, R. Art.81 EC between time present and time past: a normative critique of ‘restriction of competition’ in EU law. Common market law review. 2006;43.
82.
Odudu, O. Interpreting art.81 (1): demonstrating restrictive effect. European law review. 2001;
83.
Odudu, O. A new economic approach to art.81 (1): case comment on Metropole TV (M6). European law review. 2002;27.
84.
Bergh, Roger van den, Camesasca, Peter D. European competition law and economics: a comparative perspective. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
85.
Whish, R and Sufrin, B. Article 85 and the rule of reason. Yearbook of European law [Internet]. 1987;7. Available from: databaseName
86.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
87.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
89.
A billion-euro question. Economist. 2009;391.
90.
Monti, G. The scope of collective dominance under art.82. Common market law review. 2001;38.
91.
Monti, Giorgio. EC competition law. Vol. Law in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
92.
Bergh, Roger van den, Camesasca, Peter D. European competition law and economics: a comparative perspective. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
93.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
94.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
96.
COM(2009) 864 Commission Communication: Guidance on the Commission’s enforcement priorities in applying art.82 EC to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings, 9.2.2009.
97.
Commission (DG Competition) discussion paper on the application of article 82 of the treaty to exclusionary abuses, December 2005.
98.
Dolmans, M and Graf, T. Analysis of tying under art.82 EC: the European Commission’s Microsoft decision in perspective. World competition [Internet]. 2004;27. Available from: databaseName
99.
Kallaugher, J. Rebates revisited: anti-competitive effects and exclusionary abuse under art.82. European competition law review [Internet]. 2004;25. Available from: databaseName
100.
Monti, Giorgio. EC competition law. Vol. Law in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
101.
Oliver, P. The concept of ‘abuse’ of a dominant position under art.82: recent developments in relation to pricing. European competition journal [Internet]. 2005; Available from: databaseName
102.
Sheehan, E. Unilateral refusals to deal and the role of the essential facility doctrine: a US/EC comparative perspective. World competition [Internet]. 1999;22. Available from: databaseName
103.
Bergh, Roger van den, Camesasca, Peter D. European competition law and economics: a comparative perspective. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
104.
Loewenthal, P-J. The defence of ‘objective justification’ in the application of art.82 EC. World competition [Internet]. 2005;28. Available from: databaseName
105.
Capobianco, A. The essential facility doctrine: similarities and differences between the American and European approach. European law review. 2001;26.
106.
Doherty, B. Just what are essential facilities? Common market law review. 2001;38.
107.
Competition Law Forum’s art.82 review group. The reform of art.82: comments on the DG Competition Discussion paper of art.82 to exclusionary abuses. European competition journal [Internet]. 2006; Available from: databaseName
108.
Eilmansberger, T. How to distinguish good from bad competition under art.82: in search of clearer and more coherent standards for anti-competitive abuses. Common market law review. 2005;42.
109.
Vecchi, T. Unilateral conduct in an oligopoly according to the discussion paper on art.82: conscious parallelism or abuse of collective dominance? World competition [Internet]. 2008;31. Available from: databaseName
110.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
111.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
112.
Regulation 1/2003 on the implementation of the rules of competition laid down in articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ 2003 L1/1).
113.
Commission’s Notice on immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases (OJ 2006 C298/17).
114.
COM(2005) 672 final, Commission Green Paper on damages actions for breach of EC antitrust rules.
115.
Ameye, E. The interplay between human rights and competition law in the EU. European competition law review [Internet]. 2004;25. Available from: databaseName
116.
Levy, N and O’Donoghue, R. The EU leniency programme comes of age. World competition [Internet]. 2004;27. Available from: databaseName
117.
Monti, Giorgio. EC competition law. Vol. Law in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
118.
Pirie, M. The complainant in EC competition law. World competition [Internet]. 2000;23. Available from: databaseName
119.
Bergh, Roger van den, Camesasca, Peter D. European competition law and economics: a comparative perspective. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
120.
Venit, J. Brave new world: the modernisation and decentralisation of enforcement under arts 81 and 82 EC. Common market law review. 2003;40.
121.
Willis, P. You have the right to remain silent...or do you? The privilege against self-incrimination following Manesmannroehrenwerke and other recent decisions. European competition law review [Internet]. 2002; Available from: databaseName
122.
Wils, W. The combination of the investigative and prosecutorial function and the adjudicative function in EC antitrust enforcement: a legal and economic analysis. World competition [Internet]. 2004;27. Available from: databaseName
123.
Wils, W. Self-incrimination in EC antitrust enforcement: a legal and economic analysis. World competition [Internet]. 2003;26. Available from: databaseName
124.
Editorial Comment. A little more action please! The White Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules. Common market law review. 2008;
125.
Eilmansberger, T. The Green Paper on damages actions for breach of the EC antitrust rules and beyond: reflections on the utility and feasability of stimulating private enforcement through legislative action. Common market law review. 2007;44.
126.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
127.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
128.
Regulation 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ 2004 L24/22) (‘EC Merger Regulation’.
129.
Commission Guidelines on the assessment of horizontal mergers under the Council Regulation on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ 2004 C31/5).
130.
Commission Guidelines on the assessment of non-horizontal mergers under the Council Regulation on the control of concentrations between undertakings (November 2007).
131.
Burnley, R. Who’s afraid of conglomerate mergers? A comparison of the US and EC approaches. World competition [Internet]. 2005;28. Available from: databaseName
132.
Drauz, G. Unbundling GE/Honeywell: the Assessment of Conglomerate Mergers Under EC Competition Law. http://www.thesedonaconference.org/conferences/20011108/handouts/pdf/Portfolio%20Power%20in%20Fordham.pdf.
133.
Levy, N. EU merger control: from birth to adolescence. World competition [Internet]. 2003;26. Available from: databaseName
134.
Monti, Giorgio. EC competition law. Vol. Law in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
135.
Schmidt, J. The new EMCR: ‘significant impediment’ or ‘significant improvement’. Common market law review. 2004;41.
136.
Bergh, Roger van den, Camesasca, Peter D. European competition law and economics: a comparative perspective. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell; 2006.
137.
Furse, Mark. Competition law of the EC and UK. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
138.
Jones, Alison, Jones, Alison, Sufrin, B. E. EU competition law: text, cases, and materials. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
139.
1991 EC-US Agreement regarding the applications of their competition laws (OJ 1995 L132).
140.
1998 EC-US Agreement of the positive comity principles in the enforcement of their competition laws (OJ 1998 L173).
141.
1999 EC-Canadian Agreement regarding the application of their competition laws (OJ 1999 L175).
142.
European Commission and EU Member States communication of 2002 to the Working Group on the interaction between trade and competition policy WT/WGTCP/W/22 (19.11.02). http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2004/march/tradoc_113332.pdf.
143.
Banks, J. The development of the concept of extraterritoriality under European merger law and its effectiveness under the Merger Regulation following the Boeing/McDonnell Douglas decision. European competition law review [Internet]. 1998; Available from: databaseName
144.
Fox, E. The Merger Regulation and its territorial reach: Gencor v Commission. European competition law review [Internet]. 1999; Available from: databaseName
145.
Lange, D and Sandage, J. The Wood Pulp decision and its implications for the scope of EC Competition Law. Common market law review. 1989;
146.
Conrad, C. Strategies to reform the regulations on international competition. World competition [Internet]. 2003;26. Available from: databaseName
147.
Drexl, J. International competition policy after Cancun: placing a Singapore Issue on the WTO Development Agenda. World competition [Internet]. 2004;27. Available from: databaseName
148.
Grewlich, A. Globalisation and conflict in competition law. World competition [Internet]. 2001;24. Available from: databaseName
149.
Jenny, F. Competition, trade and development before and after Cancun. Annual Proceedings of the Fordham Law Corporate Institute, International Antitrust. 2004;30.
150.
Kaczorowska, A. International competition law in the context of global capitalism. European competition law review [Internet]. 2000; Available from: databaseName
151.
Meibom, W and Geiger, A. A world competition law as an ultima ratio. European competition law review [Internet]. 2002; Available from: databaseName
