This Article details the evolution of the commitment decisions, analyzes the logic and the consequences of the Alrosa Court judgment, and offers some suggestions on how to establish a better equilibrium between the legitimate objective of promoting the effectiveness of the Commission by allowing it enough flexibility to end cases when competition could be restored rapidly and without major expense thanks to the cooperation of investigated firms, while respecting the necessity to ensure that the effectiveness of enforcement remains compatible with three goals: developing a robust competition law jurisprudence to ensure legal predictability, particularly in abuse of dominance cases; ensuring that chosen remedies are not only the most effective to solve a case but also the most efficient way to restore competition on the affected markets; and offering investigated firms willing to cooperate with the Commission an adequate level of procedural rights.

Included in

Law Commons