EU antitrust procedural rules – Revision

The position paper argues against abolishing the formal complainant's right to a rejection decision and opposes the discontinuation of stricter national laws on unilateral conduct. It advocates for harmonising the rights of non-investigated parties and improving coordination between National Competition Authorities (NCAs) and the Commission to support public interest and the decarbonisation of the EU economy.

• ClientEarth strongly opposes the proposal to abolish the formal complainant's right to a rejection decision (Option 1), arguing that such a right is essential for respecting the rights of defence and ensuring the Commission meets its duty to state reasons under Article 296 TFEU.
• The document supports the harmonisation of rights for complainants and interested third parties (Option 2), suggesting that non-confidential versions of statements of objections should be systematically provided to third parties and that the right to be heard orally should be improved.
• ClientEarth advocates for the recognition of civil society organisations and NGOs as valuable sources of information for the Commission, particularly regarding the decarbonisation of the EU economy and consumer welfare.
• The authors oppose the discontinuation of the system that allows Member States to apply stricter national laws on unilateral conduct (Option 2), noting that these laws fill a gap where Article 102 TFEU is inapplicable because an undertaking lacks a "dominant position".
• The paper supports improving coordination and information exchange between the Commission and National Competition Authorities (NCAs) regarding stricter national laws on unilateral conduct (Option 1) to ensure complementary enforcement.
• To improve the complaint system without abolishing rejection decisions, the document suggests establishing guidance on priority cases, allowing informal contacts before formal filings, and introducing higher informational thresholds for admissibility.

APA

Holmes, S. (2025). EU antitrust procedural rules – Revision. ClientEarth. https://www.clientearth.org/media/ddson42s/clientearth-and-simon-holmes-position-paper-call-for-evidence-regarding-the-revision-of-regulation-1-2003-01102025.pdf

Chicago

Holmes, Simon. EU antitrust procedural rules – Revision. ClientEarth, 2025. https://www.clientearth.org/media/ddson42s/clientearth-and-simon-holmes-position-paper-call-for-evidence-regarding-the-revision-of-regulation-1-2003-01102025.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |last1=Holmes |first1=Simon |title=EU antitrust procedural rules – Revision |publisher=ClientEarth |date=October 2025 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/ddson42s/clientearth-and-simon-holmes-position-paper-call-for-evidence-regarding-the-revision-of-regulation-1-2003-01102025.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{holmes2025antitrust, author = {Holmes, Simon}, title = {{EU antitrust procedural rules – Revision}}, publisher = {ClientEarth}, year = {2025}, month = oct, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/ddson42s/clientearth-and-simon-holmes-position-paper-call-for-evidence-regarding-the-revision-of-regulation-1-2003-01102025.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }