The ECJ has used the term “concerted practice” which effectively broadens the meaning of collusion. In this regard, the ECJ described a concerted practice as a “form of co-operation between undertakings” from which it can be inferred that an agreement was made that compromises competition. It, therefore, follows that some form of coordination and cooperation is required for ascertaining if the undertakings were colluding or engaging in concerted practices. The criteria of co-ordination and co-operation must be understood in the light of the concept inherent in the provision of the Treaty relating to competition that each economic operator must determine independently the policy which he intends to adopt on the Common Market. Contact in furtherance of co-ordination and co-operation will typically be manifested in an exchange of information which is conducted intentionally. However, conduct can also indicate co-operation and coordination if that conduct is such that it can substantiate concerted practices. Concerted practices are easier to discern in circumstances where the market is oligopolistic and conduct is uniform. For example, there is an announcement with respect to pricing so that pricing is transparent which is followed by a uniform change in prices and uniform approaches to pricing so that this uniformity cannot be interpreted as merely coincidental. . The Modernization of Article 101 and 102 TFEU and Merger Policy over the Last Ten Years.
Howells, G.; Nordhausen, A.; Parry, D. and Twigg-Flesner, C. The Yearbook of Consumer Law 2007. (Ashgate Publishing 2007).
Kaczorowska, A. European Union Law. (Taylor and Francis 2010).
Kokkoris, I. Merger Control in Europe. (Taylor and Francis 2010).
Oinonen, M. Does EU Merger Control Discriminate Against Small Market Companies? (Kluwer Law International 2010).
Papadopoulos, A. The International Dimension of EU Competition Law and Policy. (Cambridge University Press 2010).
Albors-Llorens, A. ‘Collective Dominance: A Mechanism for the Control of Oligopolistic Markets?’ (2000) 59 The Cambridge Law Journal 235-272.
Cengiz, F. ‘Milti-Level Governance in Competition Policy: The European Competition Network.’ (2010) 35 European Law Review, 660-677.
Marcos, F. and Graells, A. ‘A Missing Step in the Modernization Stairway of EU Competition Law – Any Role for Block Exemption Regulations in the Realm of Regulation 1/2003?’ (2010) 6(2) The Competition Law Review 183-201.
Soames, T. and Maudhuit, S. ‘Changes in EU Merger Control’. (2005) 26 (1) European Competition Law Review, 57-64.
Table of Cases
BBI-Boosey and Hawkes ]1987] OJ L287/36.
Case T-219/99 British Airways Plc v Commission  ECR 11-5917.
C-95/04P BA v Commission  ECR 1-2331.
Case T-102/96 Gencor v Commission,  ECR II-753.
Case 85/76 Hoffmann-La Roache v Commission  ECR 461.
Case 48/69 Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd. v Commission (Dyestuffs)  ECR 619.
Cases 40-48/73, 50/73, 111/73, 113-114/73 Suiker Unie ECR 1663.
Case 27/76 United Brands v Commission  ECR 207.
Joined Cases C-395/96P Compagnie Maritime Belge and Others v Commission  ECR 1-1365.
Joined Cases C-2/01 P and C-3/01 Bundesverband der Arzneimittel-ImporteureeV and Commission v Bayer  4 CMLR 13.
Joined Cases 89, 104, 114, 116, 117 and 125-129/85 Ahlstrom and Others [Re Wood Pulp Cartel] v Commission  ECR 1-1307.
Table of Statutes
Commission Enforcement Priorities in Applying Article 82 of the EC Treaty to Abusive Exclusionary Conduct by Dominant Undertakings 2009.
Horizontal Merger Guidelines 2004
Merger Regulation 139/2004
Regulation 4064/89 of 1989.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples