Abstract
Ever since Sweden decided to join forces with the other EU Member States and become part of the EU, Swedish competition legislation has been closely modelled on its EU equivalent. Last year, Sweden celebrated the 20th anniversary of its modern competition law regime. The competition law rules are currently contained in the Swedish Competition Act (hereinafter “the Act”), which entered into force on 1 November 2008. However, the substantive antitrust provisions have been the same since 1993 and mirror Articles 101 and 102 TFEU.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Sw. Konkurrenslagen (SFS 2008:579).
- 2.
Chapter 6, Section 16 of the Act.
- 3.
See, e.g., the preparatory works to the Act, SOU 2006:099, En ny konkurrenslag, at p. 311.
- 4.
Council Regulation (EC) 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty, OJ L1/1.
- 5.
See preamble 13 to the Regulation.
- 6.
Proposition 2007/08:135, En ny konkurrenslag, at p. 179.
- 7.
Chapter 6, Section 1 of the Act.
- 8.
Chapter 6, Section 2 of the Act.
- 9.
Decision Dnr 346/2008, Föreningen Ackrediterade Laboratorier.
- 10.
In the preliminary assessment of the SCA, the general provisions issued by the association governing the actions of member laboratories contained a potentially anti-competitive clause. The provisions set out fixed percentage rates for determining charges payable when deliveries are delayed. In the SCA’s view, the laboratory companies should compete over the rates they charge because this can influence speed of delivery. The trade association’s voluntary undertaking involved revising the general provisions so that they now recommend the negotiation of separate agreements regarding deductions for time lost (delay charges).
- 11.
Chapter 3, Section 18 of the Act. See also: http://konkurrensverket.se/t/Page____4120.aspx.
- 12.
Regeringens proposition 2007/08:135, Ny konkurrenslag m.m., at p. 88.
- 13.
Decision Dnr 237/2007.
- 14.
Decision Dnr 327/2010.
- 15.
NCC AB m.fl. ./. Konkurrensverket, Marknadsdomstolens dom 2009:1.
- 16.
See, e.g., Aslam and Ramsden, EC Dawn Raids: A Human Rights Violation?, The Competition Law Review, Volume 5 Issue 1, December 2008, pp. 61–87. See also the appeal by Saint Gobain SA which raises the question whether the imposition of a fine by an administrative body which holds powers both on investigation and sanction is compatible with the right to an independent and impartial tribunal and of the right to respect for the presumption of innocence. Case T-56/09, Saint Gobain v. European Commission, pending.
- 17.
See, e.g., Jaeger, The Standard of Review in Competition Cases Involving Complex Economic Assessments: Towards the Marginalisation of the Marginal Review?, Journal of European Competition Law and Practice, 2011 2(4):295–314.
- 18.
Sw: Förvaltningslagen (SFS1986:223).
- 19.
- 20.
Proposition 2009/10:218, Ny lag om uppgiftsskyldighet i fråga om marknads- och konkurrensförhållanden.
- 21.
SOU 2013:16, Effektivare konkurrenstillsyn, at p. 228.
- 22.
Sw. Förvaltningslagen (SFS 1986:223).
- 23.
Case C-617/10, Åklagaren v. Hans Åkerberg Fransson [2013]. Not yet reported. The case concerned the application of the principle of ne bis in idem to certain penalties related to tax evasion.
- 24.
See, e.g., W. Devroe in General Principles of EU Law and European Private Law, “How General Should General Principles Be? Ne bis in Idem in EU Competition Law”, Wolters Kluwer 2013.
- 25.
- 26.
Chapter 4, Section 2 of the Act.
- 27.
Chapter 4, Section 4 of the Act.
- 28.
Chapter 6, Section 1 of the Act.
- 29.
Ravon v. France, judgment of 21 February 2008, Application no. 18497/03.
- 30.
Société Canal Plus ao v. France, judgment of 21 December 2010, Application no 29408/08.
- 31.
Compagnie des Gaz de Pétrole Primagaz v. France, judgment of 21 December 2010, Application no 29613/08.
- 32.
The right to a fair trial.
- 33.
Decision of the Market Court, A 5/10.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Andersson, H. (2016). Sweden. In: Kilpatrick, B., Kobel, P., Këllezi, P. (eds) Compatibility of Transactional Resolutions of Antitrust Proceedings with Due Process and Fundamental Rights & Online Exhaustion of IP Rights. LIDC Contributions on Antitrust Law, Intellectual Property and Unfair Competition. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27158-3_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27158-3_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27157-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27158-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)