Has the time come to federalize private competition law? The autonomous concept of undertaking in the CJEU's ruling in Case C-724/17 Vantaa v. Skanska: Case C-724/17 Vantaan kaupunki v. Skanska Industrial Solutions Oy and Others, EU:C:2019:204
| Author | Csongor István Nagy |
| Published date | 01 October 2019 |
| Date | 01 October 2019 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X19875354 |
| Subject Matter | Case notes |
Case note
Has the time come to
federalize private competition
law? The autonomous concept
of undertaking in the CJEU’s
ruling in Case C-724/17
Vantaa v. Skanska
Case C-724/17 Vantaan kaupunki v. Skanska
Industrial Solutions Oy and Others, EU:C:2019:204
Csongor Istv´
an Nagy*
Abstract
The private enforcement of EU competition law has been in the center of scholarly discourse for
almost two decades. Recently, the CJEU, with its ruling adopted in Vantaa v. Skanska and others,
opened a new chapter in the history of EU competition law’s private enforcement. The Court held
that the conditions of the existence of this right are questions of EU law and should be given an
autonomous meaning. The judgment is revolutionary in terms of conceptualization and, as such, it
is expected to have a considerable impact on substantive issues in the future. This signals the
advent of a uniform regime of European ‘private competition law,’ which limits the role of national
rules to the exercise of the right to compensation.
Keywords
EU competitionlaw, private enforcement, procedural autonomy, undertaking, economic continuity
1. Introduction
The private enforcement of EU competition law has been in the center of scholarly discourse for
almost two decades. While the practical relevance of actions for damages has been rather limited
during this period, producing more scholarly papers than judgments, the situation seems to have
* Szegedi Tudomanyegyetem, Szeged, Hungary
Corresponding author:
Csongor Istv´
an Nagy, Szegedi Tudomanyegyetem, 10-12 Bocskai Street, Szeged 6720, Hungary.
E-mail: csongor.nagy@gmail.com
Maastricht Journal of European and
Comparative Law
2019, Vol. 26(5) 720–728
ªThe Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1023263X19875354
maastrichtjournal.sagepub.com
MJ
MJ
To continue reading
Request your trial