We are now closed for the Christmas and New Year period, reopening on Friday 3rd January 2025. Orders placed during this time will be processed upon our return on 3rd January.
This is the 32nd edition of Sweet & Maxwell’s annual guide to EU competition law, still the essential starting point for the analysis of competition law issues for practical case work and academic study.
European Competition Law Handbook provides a comprehensive digest of Commission decisions and competition cases before the EU and national courts, conveniently cross-referenced by subject matter, for the swift location of the full list of relevant case-law, regulations and notices.
Comprehensive but simple to use reference system and clear structure:
Mergers: EU Commission prohibition in Wieland/Aurubis Rolled Products/Schwermetall (despite proposed remedies); Phase 2 clearance in Aurubis/Metallo; Phase 2 clearances with remedies including Google/Fitbit, Novelis/Aleris, PKN Orlen/Lotos, NIDEC/Whirlpool (Embraco Business) and E.ON/INNOGY; many Phase 1 decisions with and without remedies; decisions on review or implementation of remedies including Takeda/Shire, Iberia/Vueling/Clickair and IAG/BMI; EU General Court judgments in KPN, American Airlines, and HeidelbergCement and Schwenk Zement; as well as many other cases on jurisdictional and substantive points, including data and digital platforms, innovation, media and telecoms mergers.
Antitrust: ECJ judgments in the Power Cables cartel and the Retail Food Packaging cartel, Lundbeck (pay-for-delay patent settlement agreements), Slovak Telekom and Deutsche Telekom (essential facilities doctrine) and Pometon (hybrid settlements). General Court judgments in International Skating Union (competition law and sports federations), Lietuvos geležinkeliai (essential facilities doctrine) and appeals brought in the Alliance Casino & Intermarché investigations against Commission inspection decisions. The Commission decisions include cartel decisions on Ethylene and Car Closure Systems, as well as the commitments decision in Aspen (excessive pricing).
