posted on 2013-09-26, 08:30authored byMichael Harker, Sebastian Peyer, Kathryn Wright
The appropriate role of the courts in controlling the discretion of merger authorities has become one of the key issues in European merger law and policy in recent years. This article investigates judicial review of merger decisions, taking a comparative approach by examining cases from the EU, UK and Germany. We observe an apparent increase in the willingness of the EU and UK courts to scrutinize merger decisions, and a long-standing tradition of close scrutiny in Germany. In respect of the EU and UK, we consider agency theory offers a convincing explanation—that increased scrutiny is explained by the need to enhance the credibility of merger policy. In Germany, the constitutional basis of judicial review differs significantly, and the relatively close scrutiny exercised by the court is better explained by the very different constitutional context.
History
Citation
International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2011, 60 (1), pp. 93-124
Author affiliation
/Organisation/COLLEGE OF ARTS, HUMANITIES AND LAW/School of Law
Version
VoR (Version of Record)
Published in
International and Comparative Law Quarterly
Publisher
Cambridge University Press for the British Institute of International and Comparative Law