Encyclopedia of Law and Economics

2019 Edition
| Editors: Alain Marciano, Giovanni Battista Ramello

Cartels and Collusion

  • Bruce WardhaughEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_555

Abstract

This entry provides an introductory account of cartels and collusion and the means used by European and American law to control such practices. The welfare-reducing and welfare-enhancing features of these cartel and other cartel-type arrangements are discussed to demonstrate the need for considered regulation. Both horizontal and vertical arrangements are analyzed, given their different uses and effects in the economy. However, as some forms of collusive activity are welfare enhancing, these are discussed in an effort to show why regulating such behavior must be done with care. Criminal, administrative, and private sanctions are compared as means of control of such agreements. Other topics briefly discussed the nature of (legally) permitted and prohibited collusive information exchange and noneconomic concerns which may justify collusive behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

Books, Articles, Speeches and Other Documents

  1. Beaton-Wells C, Ezrachi A (eds) (2011) Criminalising cartels: critical studies of an international regulatory movement. Hart, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker G (1968) Crime and punishment: an economic approach. J Polit Econ 76:169–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bork RH (1993) The antitrust paradox: a policy at war with itself, rev edn. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Brisimi V, Ioannidou M (2011) Criminalizing cartels in Greece: a tale of hasty developments and shaky grounds. World Compet 34:157–176Google Scholar
  5. Connor JM (2010) Recidivism revealed: private international cartels 1990–2009. Compet Policy Int 6:101–127Google Scholar
  6. Connor JM, Helmers CG (2007) Statistics on private international cartels. American Antitrust Institute AAI working paper no 07–01. Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1103610. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  7. Cseres KJ, Schinkel MP, Vogelaar FOW (eds) (2006) Criminalization of competition law enforcement: economic and legal implications for the EU member states. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  8. Department of Justice (2014) Criminal enforcement fine and jail charts through fiscal year 2013. Available at http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/criminal/264101.html. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  9. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission (1995) Antitrust guidelines for the licensing of intellectual property. Available at http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/0558.htm. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  10. EU Competition Commission (2013) EU competition law rules applicable to antitrust enforcement. General block exemption regulations and guidelines, vol II. Brussels, EU. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/legislation/handbook_vol_1_en.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  11. EU Competition Commission (2014) Cartel statistics. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/competition/cartels/statistics/statistics.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  12. Faull J, Nikpay A (2014) The EU law of competition, 5th edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice (2000) Antitrust guidelines for collaborations among competitors. Available at http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_events/joint-venture-hearings-antitrust-guidelines-collaboration-among-competitors/ftcdojguidelines-2.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  14. Hodge TC (2012) Compatible or conflicting: the promotion of a high level of employment and the consumer welfare standard under article 101. William and Mary Bus Law Rev 3:59–138Google Scholar
  15. Jensen M, Meckling WH (1976) Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J Financial Econ 34:305–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jones A, Sufrin B (2014) EU competition law: text, cases and materials, 5th edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kaplow L (2013) Competition policy and price fixing. Princeton University Press, Princeton/OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kovacic WE, Marshall RC, Marx LM, White HL (2011) Plus factors and agreement in antitrust law. Michigan Law Rev 110:394–436Google Scholar
  19. Kroes N (2009) Tackling cartels – a never-ending task. Anti-cartel enforcement: criminal and administrative policy – panel session, Brasilia. Available at http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/09/454%26format=HTML%26aged=0%26language=EN%26guiLanguage=en. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  20. Lande RH (1993) Are antitrust ‘treble’ damages really single damages. Ohio State Law J 54:115–174Google Scholar
  21. Leibenstein H (1966) Allocative efficiency vs. X-inefficiency. Am Econ Rev 56:392–415Google Scholar
  22. MacCulloch A (2012) The cartel offence: defining an appropriate ‘moral space’. Eur Compet J 8:73–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marshall RC, Marx LM (2012) The economics of collusion: cartels and bidding rings. MIT Press, London/Cambridge, MACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marvel HP, McCafferty S (1984) Resale price maintenance and quality certification. Rand J Econ 15:346–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mathewson F, Winter R (1998) The law and economics of resale price maintenance. Rev Ind Organ 13:57–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Monti G (2002) Article 81 EC and public policy. Common Mark Law Rev 39:1057–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Motta M (2004) Competition policy: theory and practice. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Neils G, Jenkins H, Kavanagh J (2011) Economics for competition lawyers. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  29. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2000) Hard core cartels: 2000. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  30. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Directorate for Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs Competition Committee (2002) Report on the nature and impact of hard core cartels and sanctions against cartels under national competition laws. DAFFE/COMP(2002)7 OECD, Paris. Available at www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/20/2081831.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  31. Posner R (1975) The social cost of monopolies and regulation. J Polit Econ 83:807–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Smith A (1776) An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. London: printed for W. Strahan; and T. CadellGoogle Scholar
  33. Stephan A (2008) Survey of public attitudes to price-fixing and cartel enforcement in Britain. Compet Law Rev 5:123–145Google Scholar
  34. Stephan A (2014) Four key challenges to the successful criminalization of cartel laws. J Antitrust Enforcement 2:333–362Google Scholar
  35. Stigler G (1964) A theory of oligopoly. J Polit Econ 72:44–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Veljanovski C (2006) The economics of cartels. Finnish Competition Law Year Book. Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=975612. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  37. Wardhaugh B (2012) A normative approach to the criminalisation of cartel activity. Legal Stud 32:369–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wardhaugh B (2014) Cartels, markets and crime: a normative justification for the criminalisation of economic collusion. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Werden GJ, Hammond SD, Barnett BA (2011) Recidivism eliminated: Cartel enforcement in the United States since 1999. Speech before the: Georgetown global antitrust enforcement symposium. Washington, DC. Available at http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/speeches/275388.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  40. Whelan P (2007) A principled argument for personal criminal sanctions as punishment under EC cartel law. Compet Law Rev 4:7–40Google Scholar
  41. Whelan P (2014) The criminalization of European cartel enforcement theoretical, legal, and practical challenges. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Which? (A Consumer Advocacy Group) (2011) JJB sports: a case study in collective action. Available at http://www.which.co.uk/documents/pdf/collective-redress-case-study-which-briefing-258401.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2014
  43. Whish RP (2000) Recent developments in community competition law 1998/99. Eur Law Rev 25:219–246Google Scholar
  44. Witt AC (2012a) From Airtours to Ryanair: is the more economic approach to EU merger law really about more economics? Common Mark Law Rev 49:217–246Google Scholar
  45. Witt AC (2012b) Public policy goals under EU competition law – now is the time to set the house in order. Eur Compet J 8:443–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. World Trade Organization (WTO) (2002) Working group on the interaction between trade and competition policy, provisions on hardcore cartels: background note by the secretariat. WT/WGTCP/W/191. Geneva, WTO. 20 June 2002Google Scholar

Cases

  1. Commission DecisionsGoogle Scholar
  2. Dutch Brick Industry (“Stichting Baksteen”), Commission Decision of 29 Apr 1994 (IV/34.456) [1994] OJ L-131/15Google Scholar
  3. Synthetic Fibres, Commission Decision of 4 July 1984 (IV/30.810) [1984] OJ L-207/17Google Scholar
  4. European CourtsGoogle Scholar
  5. Case 48/69 ICI v Commission [1972] ECR 619Google Scholar
  6. Case 89/85 etc Ahlström Osakeyhtiö et al v Commission (“Wood Pulp II”) [1993] ECR I-1307Google Scholar
  7. Case C-199/92 P Hüls AG v Commission [1999] ECR I-4287Google Scholar
  8. Case C-277/87 Sandoz prodotti farmaceutici SpA v Commission [1990] ECR I-45Google Scholar
  9. Case T-41/96 Bayer AG v Commission [2000] ECR II-3383, affirmed Cases C-2 and 2/01 P [2004] ECR I-23Google Scholar
  10. Cases 56 and 58/64 Établissements Consten S.à.R.L. and Grundig-Verkaufs-GmbH v. Commission [1966] ECR 299Google Scholar
  11. Cases 228 and 229/82 Forde Werke AG and Ford of Europe Inc v Commission [1984] ECR 1129Google Scholar
  12. Argos Limited and Littlewoods Limited v Office of Fair Trading [2004] CAT 24 (“Board Games”) (Judgment on Liability)Google Scholar
  13. JJB Sports PLC v Office of Fair Trading and Allsports Limited v Office of Fair Trading [2004] CAT 17 (“Replica Football Kits”) (Judgment on Liability)Google Scholar
  14. Tesco Stores Ltd, Tesco Holdings Ltd and Tesco Plc v Office of Fair Trading [2012] CAT 31 (“Dairy”) (Judgment on Liability)Google Scholar
  15. Broadcast Music, Inc v CBS, 441 US 1 (USSC 1979)Google Scholar
  16. California Dental Association v FTC, 526 US 756 (USSC 1999)Google Scholar
  17. Continental TV, Inc v GTE Sylvania Inc, 433 US 36 (USSC 1977)Google Scholar
  18. Dr Miles v John D. Park & Sons Co, 220 US 373 (USSC 1911)Google Scholar
  19. Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc v PSKS, Inc, 551 US 877 (USSC 2007)Google Scholar
  20. National Collegiate Athletic Association v Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma, 468 US 85 (USSC 1984)Google Scholar
  21. Northern Pacific Railway v United States, 356 US 1 (USSC 1958)Google Scholar
  22. Standard Oil Co v United States, 221 US 1 (USSC 1911)Google Scholar
  23. United States v Apple Inc, 952 F Supp 2d 638, 2013–2 Trade Cases P 78,447 (SDNY July 10, 2013)Google Scholar
  24. Verizon Communications Inc v Law Offices of Curtis V Trinko, LLP, 540 US 398 (USSC 2004)Google Scholar

Statutes and Other Legal Instruments

  1. Enterprise Act 2002Google Scholar
  2. Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013Google Scholar
  3. European UnionGoogle Scholar
  4. Commission Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 of 20 April 2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices [2010] OJ L-102/1Google Scholar
  5. Council Regulation (EC) No. 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (“Regulation 1/2003”) [2003] OJ L-1/1Google Scholar
  6. Guidelines on Vertical Restraints [2010] OJ C-130/1Google Scholar
  7. Regulation No 17: First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (“Regulation 17/62”) OJ 013, 21/02/1962 pp 0204–0211Google Scholar
  8. Treaty for the Functioning of the European Union (Consolidated version) [2012] OJ C-326/47Google Scholar
  9. Clayton Act, 15 USC §§ 12–27, 29, 52–53Google Scholar
  10. National Cooperative Research Act of 1984 and the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, codified together at 15 USC §§ 4301–06Google Scholar
  11. Sherman Act, 15 USC §§ 1–7Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of LawQueen’s University BelfastBelfastUK