Concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.Case comment to the judgment of Court of Competition and Consumer Protection of 8 February 2011 – ZST Gamrat S.A. v President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection(Ref. No. XVII Ama 16/10)

The case in question represents just one of several legal actions that ZTS Gamrat and its distributors undertook against the decision of the Polish national competition agency, the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (hereafter, UOKiK President, after the Polish acronym)....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Monika A. Górska
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Warsaw 2012-08-01
Series:Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
Online Access:https://yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/images/yars2012_5_6/s289.pdf
id doaj-7ede3ba1eda7408e85806d8fc6df5a83
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7ede3ba1eda7408e85806d8fc6df5a832020-11-25T04:11:14ZengUniversity of WarsawYearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies1689-90242545-01152012-08-0156289295Concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.Case comment to the judgment of Court of Competition and Consumer Protection of 8 February 2011 – ZST Gamrat S.A. v President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection(Ref. No. XVII Ama 16/10)Monika A. GórskaThe case in question represents just one of several legal actions that ZTS Gamrat and its distributors undertook against the decision of the Polish national competition agency, the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (hereafter, UOKiK President, after the Polish acronym). This legal battle commenced in 2005 and still has not been resolved, as the judgment of the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection (hereafter, the SOKiK) discussed in this comment has been appealed by the UOKiK President. The Court of Appeals, in its judgment of 20thOctober 2011 (ref. no. VI ACa 564/11), referred the case back to the SOKiK due to the invalidity of the trial before that Court. Hence, the pronounced judgment was set aside and the proceeding before the SOKiK will be repeated. Nonetheless, while keeping in mind that the judgment is under reconsideration, it is worth taking a closer look at the judgment originally issued as it tackles the interesting question of the legal prerequisites of an agreement restricting competition contrary to competition law.https://yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/images/yars2012_5_6/s289.pdf
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Monika A. Górska
spellingShingle Monika A. Górska
Concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.Case comment to the judgment of Court of Competition and Consumer Protection of 8 February 2011 – ZST Gamrat S.A. v President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection(Ref. No. XVII Ama 16/10)
Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
author_facet Monika A. Górska
author_sort Monika A. Górska
title Concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.Case comment to the judgment of Court of Competition and Consumer Protection of 8 February 2011 – ZST Gamrat S.A. v President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection(Ref. No. XVII Ama 16/10)
title_short Concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.Case comment to the judgment of Court of Competition and Consumer Protection of 8 February 2011 – ZST Gamrat S.A. v President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection(Ref. No. XVII Ama 16/10)
title_full Concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.Case comment to the judgment of Court of Competition and Consumer Protection of 8 February 2011 – ZST Gamrat S.A. v President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection(Ref. No. XVII Ama 16/10)
title_fullStr Concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.Case comment to the judgment of Court of Competition and Consumer Protection of 8 February 2011 – ZST Gamrat S.A. v President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection(Ref. No. XVII Ama 16/10)
title_full_unstemmed Concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.Case comment to the judgment of Court of Competition and Consumer Protection of 8 February 2011 – ZST Gamrat S.A. v President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection(Ref. No. XVII Ama 16/10)
title_sort concurrence of wills – a necessary ingredient of an agreement restricting competition.case comment to the judgment of court of competition and consumer protection of 8 february 2011 – zst gamrat s.a. v president of the office of competition and consumer protection(ref. no. xvii ama 16/10)
publisher University of Warsaw
series Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies
issn 1689-9024
2545-0115
publishDate 2012-08-01
description The case in question represents just one of several legal actions that ZTS Gamrat and its distributors undertook against the decision of the Polish national competition agency, the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (hereafter, UOKiK President, after the Polish acronym). This legal battle commenced in 2005 and still has not been resolved, as the judgment of the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection (hereafter, the SOKiK) discussed in this comment has been appealed by the UOKiK President. The Court of Appeals, in its judgment of 20thOctober 2011 (ref. no. VI ACa 564/11), referred the case back to the SOKiK due to the invalidity of the trial before that Court. Hence, the pronounced judgment was set aside and the proceeding before the SOKiK will be repeated. Nonetheless, while keeping in mind that the judgment is under reconsideration, it is worth taking a closer look at the judgment originally issued as it tackles the interesting question of the legal prerequisites of an agreement restricting competition contrary to competition law.
url https://yars.wz.uw.edu.pl/images/yars2012_5_6/s289.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT monikaagorska concurrenceofwillsanecessaryingredientofanagreementrestrictingcompetitioncasecommenttothejudgmentofcourtofcompetitionandconsumerprotectionof8february2011zstgamratsavpresidentoftheofficeofcompetitionandconsumerprotectionrefnoxviiama1610
_version_ 1724418342367789056