Effectiveness of Judicial Review in the Polish Competition Law System and the Place for Judicial Deference

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

Maciej Bernatt¹ 

[1] UniversityofWarsaw,FacultyofManagement,DepartmentofEuropeanEconomicLaw;

关键词: competition law;    antitrust;    judicial review;    judicial deference;    due process;    procedure;    courts;    administration;    eu;    central and eastern europe;    poland;   

DOI  :  10.7172/1689-9024.YARS.2016.9.14.4

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

ThearticlediscussestheeffectivenessandtheintensityofjudicialreviewinthePolish competition law system. First, it studies whether the judicial review offered bythe1stinstanceCourtofCompetitionandConsumerProtectioninWarsaw(SOKiK)iseffectiveinpractice.Next,thearticleanalyzeswhetherPolishcourtstend to defer to the findings of the Polish competition authority, UOKiK. Judgments of the Supreme Court concerning relevant market definition serve as case studies. Finally,thearticlediscusseswhetherproceedingsbeforethePolishcompetitionauthorityensuresufficientdueprocessguarantees,theimpartialityofdecision-makers,andtheoverallexpertcharacterofUOKiK’sdecision-makingprocess.Onthisbasisthearticleexamineswhethertherearegroundsforthereviewingcourts to defer to UOKiK’s findings. The article concludes that currently the review undertaken by SOKiK happens to be superficial and thus ineffective. At the same time,theSupremeCourt’sreviewofthedeterminationoftherelevantmarketisnot deferential towards UOKiK’s findings. The Supreme Court substitutes its own definition of the relevant market for that of UOKiK and that of the lower courts. However,thearticleshowsthattherearenogroundsatthemomentforarguingforgreaterjudicialdeference.ProceedingsheldbeforeUOKiK,despiterecentlyintroducedimprovements,stilldonotoffersufficientdueprocessguaranteesoradivisionbetweeninvestigatoryanddecision-makingfunctions.Inaddition,UOKiK’s expertise is not sufficient for both institutional and practical reasons.

【 授权许可】

Unknown