Incentivising Innovation? The competition law approach to the new challenge clauses in the competition rules for technology licensing agreements of the EU

Tutkielman aiheena on EU:n kilpailuoikeudellinen lähestymistapa challenge-lausekkeisiin teknologinsiirtosopimuksia koskevassa ryhmäpoikkeusasetuksessa. Teknologian lisensoinnin katsotaan olevan tärkeä väline teknologian kehityksen levittämisessä ja innovaation edistämisessä. Joissakin tapauksissa lisenssisopimus voi sisältää kilpailua rajoittavia lausekkeita, joiden voidaan kuitenkin nähdä hyödyttävän kilpailua kokonaisuutta arvostellen. Tällaisia lausekkeita ovat niin sanotut ”no-challenge” – lauseke, eli sopimusehto, jonka nojalla lisenssinsaaja sitoutuu olemaan haastamatta lisensoidun immateriaalioikeuden pätevyyttä ja ”termination-on-challenge” – lauseke, joka antaa lisensoijalle haastettaessa oikeuden päättää lisenssisopimus. Tutkielmassa perehdytään challenge -lausekkeiden hyväksyttävyyden arviointiin Euroopan unionin kilpailuoikeuden näkökulmasta uuden 1.5.2014 voimaan tulleen ryhmäpoikkeusasetuksen valossa. Muissa kuin yksinoikeuksia luovissa teknologiansiirtosopimuksissa olevat termination-on-challenge – lausekkeita tulee uusimmassa ryhmäpoikkeusetuksessa aina perustua yritysten itse suorittamaan tapauskohtaiseen arviointiin. No-challenge – lausekkeet ovat jatkossakin aiemman käytännön mukaisesti ryhmäpoikkeuksen soveltamisalan ulkopuolella. Komission on perustellut challenge - lausekkeiden jättämistä asetuksen ulkopuolelle julkisella intressillä, joka on päästä eroon mitättömistä immateriaalioikeuksista. Komission on katsonut, että challenge – lausekkeiden kilpailua rajoittava ominaisuus on mitättömien immateriaalioikeuksien esiintyminen markkinoilla, mikä osaltaan vääristää kilpailua ja hidastaa toimijoiden markkinoille pääsyä. Toisaalta lausekkeiden voidaan sanoa edistävän kilpailua, sillä ne usein tarjoavat immateriaalioikeuden haltijalle riittävän oikeussuojan ja kannustimen lisensoida teknologia, mikä lisää kilpailua, keksijöiden kannustimia panostaa innovaatioihin sekä vähentää transaktiokustannuksia. Tutkielman keskeinen tulos on ennen kaikkea challenge-lausekkeiden kilpailuvaikutusten tunnistamisessa ja komission perusteluiden kriittisessä arvioinnissa. Komission linjauksen perustelut eivät saa riittävää tukea ottaen huomioon vaikutustenarvioinnin, EU:n tuomioistuinkäytännön sekä taloustieteellisen lähestymistavan. Tutkielman tulosten pohjalta ja tukeutuen eri oikeuslähteisiin, taloustieteellisiin argumentteihin ja oikeusvertailevaan tutkimukseen, on mahdollista tehdä johtopäätöksiä niistä seikoista ja argumenteista, joilla on merkitystä uuden politiikkalinjauksen kilpailuvaikutuksiin.

In Search for the European solidarity: The rule of law within the European Union in the framework of constitutional pluralism

The dissertation examines the rule of law within the European Union in the theoretical framework of constitutional pluralism. The leading lines of constitutional pluralism are examined with relation to the traditional and prevailing, monistic and hierarchical conceptions on how to perceive legal orders in Europe. The theoretical part offers also historical perspective by highlighting some of the turning points for the Union constitutional legal order in the framework of European integration. The concept of rule of law is examined in legal terms and its meaning to the Union constitutional constellation as a constitutional principle and a common value is observed. The realization of the rule of law at supranational and national level is explored with a view to discover that recent developments in some of the Member States give rise to concern about the viability of the rule of law within the European Union. It is recognized that the inobservance of the rule of law at national level causes a threat to the supranational constitutional legal order. The relationship between the supranational and national legal orders is significant in this respect and therefore particularly the interaction between the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter the ECJ) and the Member States’ (constitutional/supreme) courts takes focus. It is observed that functioning dialogue between the supranational and national courts based on mutual respect and judicial deference is an important prerequisite for the realization of the rule of law within Europe. In order to afford a concrete example, a recent case C-62/14 Gauweiler v Deutscher Bundestag is introduced and analysed in relation to the notorious relationship between the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany and the ECJ. The implications of the ECJ’s decision in Gauweiler v Deutscher Bundestag is assessed with reference to some of the pressing issues of constitutionalism within Europe and some institutional aspects are also brought forward. Lastly, the feasibility of constitutional pluralism as a theoretical setting is measured against the legal reality of today’s Europe and its many constitutions. The hierarchical idea of one ultimate source of power, stemming from the traditional approaches to legal systems, is then assessed with relation to the requirement of the realization of the rule of law within the European Union from the supranational and national point of view.

Parental and Successor Liability in EU Competition Law Infringements

Under EU competition law, parent companies may be held jointly and severally liable for the competition law infringements committed by their subsidiaries. The possibility of holding parent companies liable demonstrates a significant exception from the idea of separate legal entities. However, it is not the only deviation developed under EU competition law. In cases, where the legal entity responsible for the anti-competitive conduct has changed its form, liability can be attributed to the new operator, in particular, to its successor. The principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations are issues that surround the doctrines of parental and successor liability. The aim of this thesis is to present a comprehensive comparative analysis of the parental and successor liability doctrines and to clarify the conditions under which it is possible to attribute liability for the infringements of EU competition law. The main purpose is therefore to demonstrate the problems related to the allocation of liability and to discuss whether these liability principles, established to assure the effective enforcement of the EU competition rules, are good solutions. The research methods used in this thesis are the legal dogmatic approach and the comparative law approach. The former enables the possibility of using the case law and legislation as a framework in which the difficulties concerning the application of parental and successor liability can be discussed while the latter ensures the comparison of the characteristics and judgments. The doctrines of parental and successor liability are both well established, but the application practice has caused several difficulties. These problems derive from, inter alia, the broadness and disjointed developed of the doctrines. There has been much recent case law dealing with these issues and having the potential to open up a considerable risk and to allocate strict liability for parent and successor companies.