Abstract
The AGCM (or ICA) and Italian administrative Courts plays a decisive role in the enforcement of antitrust law. Rules of Law are various and involve different sectors of Italian law (criminal, civil and administrative).
Although Italy does not provide tout court for criminal antitrust liability, antitrust violations are increasingly relevant under a criminal standpoint. This seems more evident if one considers the recent Protocols executed between AGCM, ANAC (Anti-Corruption Authority) and the Rome and Milan Prosecutors’ Offices, aimed to creating the conditions to neutralize criminal behaviors with anti-competitive implications.
However, the main laws are still in the civil and administrative fields. To date, the most important are Law no. 287/1990 and Law no. 689/1981. Particularly relevant are also the Italian Guidelines on Sanctions 2014 which, in the wake of the EU soft law model, define the criteria for calculating sanctions, the related leniency programs, as well as internal organizational procedures.
Recently, after a cautious approach to the EU principle of the “single economic unit”, the Italian authorities have begun to take into consideration the Parent Liability phenomena, also with particular attention to business associations.
The Italian system of antitrust law enforcement is vast and well-articulated. Although such system could be improved in some respects, it would not significantly benefit from the possible introduction of individual antitrust liability and of criminal antitrust liability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
See, e.g., E. A. Raffaelli, Italy, The Private Competition Enforcement Review, 11th ed. 2018, p. 165 ff.
- 2.
G. Massarotto, Intese restrittive della concorrenza (anno 2016), Concorrenza e Mercato 2017.
- 3.
D.lgs. 231/2001, English version available at http://www.oecd.org/investment/anti-bribery/anti-briberyconvention/45508054.pdf.
- 4.
Article 5 (Liability of the agency), D.lgs 231/2001.
- 5.
From Article 10 to 19 of the D.Lgs 231/2001.
- 6.
See, e.g., AGCM, Press Release: The Italian Competition Authority and the Public Prosecutor’s Offices of Milan and Rome signed a memorandum of understanding, http://en.agcm.it/en/media/press-releases/2018/1/alias-2493. Accessed 6 November 2018; C. Ienca, Protocollo d’intesa tra l’Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM) e le Procure di Roma e Milano: maggior contrasto alla corruzione e alle condotte anticoncorrenziali, in Diritto Bancario (Febr. 12, 2018), available at http://www.dirittobancario.it/news/antitrust-e-concorrenza/protocollo-d-intesa-tra-autorita-garante-della-concorrenza-e-del-mercato-agcm-e-le-procure. Accessed 23 October 2018.
- 7.
Italy, The ICA fines a cartel in the supply of electromechanical goods and services for the railway sector (Dec. 17, 2015), available at https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/multisite/ecn-brief/en/content/ica-fines-cartel-supply-electromechanical-goods-and-services-railway-sector. Accessed 23 October 2018.
- 8.
See AGCM, A437-Esselunga/Coop Estense, provv. n. 23639, in Boll. 24/2012.
- 9.
Article 1.4 of the Law 287/1990.
- 10.
European Commission, Press release Competition: Commission revises Guidelines for setting fines in antitrust cases (Jun. 28, 2006) available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-06-857_en.htm?locale=en. Accessed 23 October 2018.
See N. Castelnuovo, Italian Competition Authority issues guidelines on antitrust infringement fines, Lexology (Nov. 4, 2014) available at https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6d53ff6e-e28c-4595-93d2-f5049434b821 Accessed 23 October 2018. (‘The Authority was one of the few national authorities within the European Network that had not adopted guidelines on the setting of fines. Until now, the Authority has applied both the European Commission’s guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation No 1/2003 and the national case law on the application of pecuniary administrative fines.’)
- 11.
For a comment on the Italian Guidelines on sanctions 2014, see F. Ghezzi and G. D. Pini, The Italian Guidelines on the method of setting fines. A (half) step towards transparency and deterrence, available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2675716. Accessed 23 October 2018.
- 12.
F. Ammassari, Guidelines on the Method of Setting Fines for Infringements of Competition Rules: Key Issues, Italian Antitrust Review n. 3 (2014), p. 231.
- 13.
The draft of the Italian Guidelines on sanctions 2014 was published along with a report which illustrated for each rule both the EU provisions set in the EU Guidelines and the solutions adopted in other member states. The report also specified the main issues raised by the judicial review.
- 14.
See F. Ammassari, supra note 12.
- 15.
F. Ghezzi and G. D. Pini, supra note 11, at 13.
- 16.
AGCM, Linee Guida sulla modalità di applicazione dei criteri di quantificazione delle sanzioni amministrative pecuniarie irrogate dall’Autorità in applicazione dell’articolo 15, comma 1, della legge n. 287/90, section 3.
- 17.
See Competition Policy International, Italy: Antitrust Authority Fines Accounting Firms (Nov. 7, 2017), available at https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/italy-antitrust-authority-fines-accounting-firms/. Accessed 23 October 2018. Reuters, Italy Antitrust Fines ‘Big Four’ Accounting Firms Total of 23 Million Euros (Nov. 7, 2017), available at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-Italy-antitrust/Italy-antitrust-fines-big-four-accounting-firms-total-of-23-million-euros-idUSKBN1D72DE. Accessed 23 October 2018. According to the AGCM, that case was one of the most serious violations of the antitrust law.
- 18.
AGCM, Linee Guida sulla modalità di applicazione dei criteri di quantificazione delle sanzioni amministrative pecuniarie irrogate dall’Autorità in applicazione dell’articolo 15, comma 1, della legge n. 287/90, section 20.
- 19.
Similar ‘entry fee’ exists in the EU Guidelines. ‘In order to deter companies from ever entering into seriously illegal conduct: The Commission may add to the amount as calculated above a sum equal to 15% to 25% for the year of relevant sales, whatever the duration of the infringement. According to the Guidelines, such as ‘entry fee’ will be applied in cartel cases and may be applied in other types of anti-trust infringements.’ European Commission, Press release Competition: Commission revises Guidelines for setting fines in antitrust cases (Jun. 28, 2006) available at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-06-857_en.htm?locale=en.
- 20.
AGCM, Linee Guida sulla modalità di applicazione dei criteri di quantificazione delle sanzioni amministrative pecuniarie irrogate dall’Autorità in applicazione dell’articolo 15, comma 1, della legge n. 287/90, section 22.
- 21.
AGCM, I794-ABI/SEDA, provv. n. 26595, in Boll. 19/2017 section 363, 364 d).
- 22.
F. Ghezzi and G. D. Pini, supra note 11, at 23. (‘[T]he mere existence of a compliance programme will not be considered as a mitigating circumstance.’).
- 23.
AGCM, I793-Aumento prezzi cemento, provv. n. 26705, in Boll. 31/2017, section 350.
- 24.
AGCM, I789-Agenzie di modelle, provv. n. 26229, in Boll. 40/2016.
- 25.
AGCM, I793-Aumento prezzi cemento, provv. n. 26705, in Boll. 31/2017 section 358, 359; AGCM, I742-Tondini per cemento armato, provv. n. 26686, in Boll. 30/2017, section 347.
- 26.
N. di Castelnuovo, Italian Competition Authority issues guidelines on antitrust infringement fines, Lexology (Nov. 4, 2014) available at https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6d53ff6e-e28c-4595-93d2-f5049434b821. Accessed 6 November 2018.
- 27.
Consiglio di Stato, n. 3291/2015.
- 28.
Consiglio di Stato, n. 3291/2015.
- 29.
Article 15 of the Law.
- 30.
See AGCM, A495-Gara TPL Padova, provv. n. 26610, in Boll. 20/2017.
- 31.
See Court of Appeal of Milan, 29 April 1995; Court of Appeal of Rome, 12 February 1995.
- 32.
Court of Appeal of Milan, 29 September 1999.
- 33.
See Italian Guidelines on sanctions 2014, paragraph 12.
- 34.
AGCM, I789-Agenzie di modelle, provv. n. 26229, in Boll. 40/2016.
- 35.
AGCM, A480-Incremento Prezzo Farmaci Aspen, provv. n. 26185, in Boll. 36/2016.
- 36.
AGCM, A482-E-Class/Borsa Italiana, provv. n. 25859, in Boll. 4/2016; AGCM, A486-ENEL Distribuzione-Rimozione Coatta Dispositivi Smart Metering, provv. n. 26167, in Boll. 31/2016.
- 37.
See Court of Cassation No. 1183/2007.
- 38.
Court of Cassation Joint Session No. 16601/2017.
- 39.
OECD Annual Report on Competition Policy Developments in Italy 2016 (Dec. 5-6, 2017), available at https://one.oecd.org/document/DAF/COMP/AR(2017)33/en/pdf. Accessed 6 November 2018.
- 40.
AGCM, I783-Accordo tra operatori del settore vending, provv. n. 26064, in Boll. 21/2016, especially at paragraph 402.
- 41.
See, in this respect, Regional Administrative Court of Latium, judgments No 9057 of July 20th, 2017 and No 9062 of July, 28th, 2017. It should be noted, however, that both judgments have been appealed before the Council of State: the appeals are currently pending.
- 42.
See AGCM, I783B1-Accordo tra operatori del settore vending-rideterminazione della sanzione Sellmat, provv. n. 27306, in Boll. 33/2018 and I783B2-Accordo tra operatori del settore vending-rideterminazione della sanzione Supermatic, provv. n. 27275, in Boll. 30/2018.
- 43.
See Regional Administrative Court of Latium, judgments No 9061 and No 9065 of July 28th, 2017. Also, these judgments have been appealed before the Council of State: the appeals are still pending.
- 44.
AGCM, I793-Aumento prezzi cemento, provv. n. 26705, in Boll. 31/2017.
- 45.
AGCM, I794-ABI/SEDA, provv. n. 26595, in Boll. 19/2017 section 363, 364 d).
- 46.
AGCM, I803-Condotte restrittive del consiglio notarile di Milano, provv. n. 26327, in Boll. 2/2017.
- 47.
AGCM, I797-Consiglio Notarile di Roma, Velletri e Civitavecchia/Delibera in tema di distribuzione del lavoro nella dismissione pubblica, provv. n. 26625, in Boll. 24/2017.
- 48.
Id.
- 49.
Italian Guidelines on sanctions 2014, paragraph 10.
- 50.
Tar Lazio n. 8346, 30 July 2014; Tar Lazio n. 1757, 25 February 2011.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Franzosi, M., Raffaelli, O. (2019). Italy. In: Këllezi, P., Kilpatrick, B., Kobel, P. (eds) Liability for Antitrust Law Infringements & Protection of IP Rights in Distribution. LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17550-4_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17550-4_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-17549-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-17550-4
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)