Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014   IUP :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014    Tam Metin (PDF)

Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları

Zeynep Ayata

Birleşik Krallık, 26 Haziran 2016 tarihli referandum ile başlayan sürecin devamında, 16 Mart 2017 tarihli kanun dayanarak, Avrupa Birliği (AB) tam üyeliğinden çıkmak için Avrupa Birliği Antlaşması’nın 50. maddesi gereğince başvuruda bulunmuştur. Bu başvuru ile başlayan süreç Birleşik Krallık’ın yasal düzeninde köklü değişiklikler ve yasal boşluklar yaratacak niteliktedir, zira kırk yılı aşkın bir süredir Birleşik Krallık AB müktesebatına tabidir ve ulusal düzenlemelerini AB hukuku ile uyumlaştırmıştır. Rekabet hukuku AB hukukunun en bütünleşik ve uyumlaştırmanın en fazla olduğu alanlarından biridir. Bu makalede Birleşik Krallık’ın AB üyeliğinden çıkmasının rekabet hukuku ve uygulaması bakımından sonuçları ele alınmıştır. Makalede öncelikle Birleşik Krallık’ın AB üyeliğinden bir tür ticari ve ekonomik antlaşma ile çıkmasının rekabet hukuku bakımından olası sonuçları tartışılmıştır. İkinci bölümde sürecin daha sağlıklı ve sistemli ilerlemesi için ara dönem düzenlemesi yapılmasının önemi vurgulanmıştır. Makalenin son bölümünde ise Birleşik Krallık’ın hiçbir antlaşma olmaksızın AB üyeliğinden ayrılmasının maddi hukuk, muafiyet sistemi, özel hukuk yaptırımları, birleşme ve devralmaların denetlenmesi, devlet destekleri ve idari yapı bakımından doğuracağı sorunlar ve açmazlar incelenmiştir. 

DOI :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014   IUP :10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014    Tam Metin (PDF)

The Consequences and Predicaments for Competititon Law and Enforcement of United Kingdom’s Withdrawal from European Union Membership

Zeynep Ayata

In the aftermath of the June 26th 2016 referendum, the United Kingdom (UK) has invoked article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union’s (EU) withdrawal process relying on the act of parliament of March 16th 2017. The process that started with the invocation of article 50 is one that will lead to significant changes and loopholes in the British legal order as the UK has been subject to the EU acquis and has been harmonising its legislation accordingly for more than forty years. Competition law is one the most complete and harmonised areas of EU law. This article examines the consequences of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU with regard to competition law and enforcement. The first part of the article discusses the possible consequences of UK’s withdrawal with an economic or trade deal with the EU for competition law. The second part the article stresses the necessity of transitional arrangements for an orderly and healthy withdrawal in terms of competition law. In the final part, the article examines the problems and predicaments of a no deal exit with regard to substantive competition law, the exemption system, private enforcement of competition law, the control of mergers and acquisitions, state aids and the administrative structure. 


GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


In the aftermath of the June 26th 2016 referendum, the United Kingdom (UK) has invoked article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union’s (EU) withdrawal process relying on the act of parliament of March 16th 2017. This act has triggered a unique process as no other EU has member state has officially invoked article 50 before. EU member states, starting from their candidacy period must harmonise and align their national legislation with EU law. The UK, as a member state, has accepted, transposed and implemented EU law for more than forty-five years. Hence the process that started with the invocation of article 50 is one that may lead to significant changes and loopholes in the British legal order as the UK has been subject to EU acquis during its membership. Competition law is one the most complete and harmonised areas of EU law. According to article 3 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), competition falls under the exclusive competence of the Union. Furthermore, until the adoption of Regulation 1/2003, only EU institutions could implement EU competition law, leaving only national competition law to the competence of national authorities and courts. This framework, combined with the principle of harmonious interpretation, accorded EU institutions and courts a central role in the enforcement and development of competition policy. This article examines the consequences of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU with regard to competition law and enforcement. The first part of the article discusses the possible consequences of UK’s withdrawal with an economic or trade deal with the EU for competition law. The EU has developed several levels of economic integration with neighbouring and nonneighbouring countries such as customs union agreements, free trade agreements or cooperation agreements. The first part of the article examines these different bilateral and mixed agreements and displays their implications for competition law and policy. Furthermore, the article discusses whether these agreements, in general or in terms of their specific aspects, could be a model for future economic relations between the UK and the EU. The latest Withdrawal Agreement which was rejected in October 2019 and its implications for economic cooperation are also briefly analysed in this first part. This analysis leads to the conclusion that the economic cooperation foreseen in this Agreement presents a combination of several different elements found in various bilateral agreements entered into by the EU and aims to apply differentiated levels of integration in different geographies, especially in Northern Ireland which may have interesting implications for enforcement of competition law. The second part of the article stresses the necessity of transitional arrangements for an orderly and healthy withdrawal in terms of competition law. This part focuses mostly on ongoing proceedings and the possibility of applying EU competition law in the UK throughout the transition period. This discussion also underlines the importance of determining the conditions under which EU competition law may be applied, most importantly as part of the competence of the EU Commission and Courts, to behaviours of undertakings that have taken place within the membership period or the transition period but have been discovered after the membership has ended. Finally, the article examines the problems and predicaments of a no deal exit with regard to substantive competition law, the exemption system, private enforcement of competition law, the control of mergers and acquisitions, state aids and the administrative structure. A no deal exit will lead to significant uncertainties with regard to enforcement and interpretation of competition law which will mostly be observed in the internal UK legal order. The article discusses the measures that may be taken by the UK legislator and authorities in order avert legal uncertainty. Some of the suggestions put forward in this part rely on the examples of economic cooperation discussed in the first part of the article. The article also refers to and discusses elements contained in those withdrawal agreements that have been rejected by the UK Parliament that may be relevant to the effect of EU law generally and EU competition law specifically in the UK after Brexit.


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Eserler Andreangeli A, ‘The Consequences of Brexit for Competition Litigation: An End to a “Success Story?”’ (2017) 38 European Competition Law Review 222 google scholar
  • Armstrong K A, ‘Regulatory alignment and divergence after Brexit’ (2018) 25 Journal of European Public Policy 1099 google scholar
  • Aşçıoğlu Öz G., ‘Rekabet Hukuku ve Politikası’, içinde Belki Akçay ve İlke Göçmen (der), Avrupa Birliği: Tarihçe, Teoriler, Kurumlar ve Politikalar (Seçkin Yayıncılık 2014) google scholar
  • Basedow J, ‘Brexit and Business Law’ (2017) 5 China-EU Law Journal 101 google scholar
  • Crafts N, ‘Brexit and State Aid’ (2017) 33 Oxford Review of Economic Policy 105 Craig P and Búrca G, EU Law Text, Cases, and Materials (Sixth Edition, OUP 2015) google scholar
  • Danoy M, Becker F and Beaumont P, Cross-Border EU Competition Law Actions (Hart Publishing 2013) 37-42 google scholar
  • Karacan P, ‘Brexit: Avrupa Birliği Hukuku ve Birleşik Krallık Açısından ‘Buzdağının Görünen Yüzü’’ (2017) 19 Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 403 google scholar
  • Kux S and Sverdrup U, ‘Fuzzy borders and adaptive outsiders: Norway, Switzerland and the EU’ (2000) 22 Journal of European Integration 237 google scholar
  • Maier-Rigaud F P, ‘Toward a European Directive on Damages Actions’ (2014) 10 Journal of Competition Law and Economics 342 google scholar
  • Miles T, ‘Britain and EU formally start splitting WTO membership agreements’ Reuters (24 July 2018) <https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-wto/britain-and-eu-formally-start-splittingwto-membership-agreements-idUKKBN1KE2LJ> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • Monti G, ‘The United Kingdom’s Contribution to European Union Competition Law’ (2017) 40 Fordham International Law Journal 1444 google scholar
  • Özkan I, ‘Birinci Bölüm Hukuki ve Ticari Konularda Mahkemelerin Milletlerarası Yetkisi ile Mahkeme Kararlarının Tanınması ve Tenfizi Hakkında Brüksel I Bis Recast Tüzüğü’, içinde Işıl Özkan, Ceyda Süral ve Uğur Tütüncübaşı (der), Avrupa Birliği Devletler Özel Hukuku (Adalet Yayınevi 2016) google scholar
  • Sampson T, ‘Brexit: The Economics of International Disintegration’ (2017) 31 Journal of Economic Perspectives 163 Schimmelfennig F, ‘Brexit: differentiated disintegration in the European Union’ (2018) 25 Journal of European Public Policy 1154 google scholar
  • Roth P, ‘Competition Law and Brexit: the challenges ahead’ (2017) Jordan Publishing 5 www.bclwg.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CLJ_2017_01_Sir_Peter_Roth.pdf> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 Tomlinson J and Lovdahl Gormsen L, ‘Stumbling Towards the UK’s New Administrative Settlement: A Study of Competition Law Enforcement After Brexit’ (2018) 20 Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies 233 Vickers J, “Consequences of Brexit for competition law and policy’ (2017) 33 Oxford Review of Economic Policy 70 Whish R, ‘Brexit and EU Competition Policy’, (2016) 7 Journal of European Competition Law and Practice google scholar
  • Mevzuat google scholar
  • Guidance on changes to the jurisdictional thresholds for UK merger control <https://assets. publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/715167/ guidance_on_changes_to_the_jurisdictional_thresholds_for_uk_merger_control.pdf> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • Kararlar google scholar
  • Commission, ‘2017/1283 of 30 August 2016 on State aid SA.38373 (2014/C) (ex 2014/NN) (ex 2014/CP) implemented by Ireland to Apple’ <http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_ details.cfm?proc_code=3_SA_38373> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • Provimi Ltd. Aventis Animal Nutrition SA, 2003 EWCH 961 google scholar
  • State aid SA.38944 (2014/C) (2014/NN) Alleged aid to Amazon Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, <http:// ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_details.cfm?proc_code=3_SA_38944> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • Raporlar google scholar
  • BCLWG, ‘Recommendations’ <http://www.bclwg.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/BCLWGConclusions-and-Recommendations-Final.pdf> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • Brexit: Competition and State Aid (House of Lords European Union Committee 12th Report of Session 2017-19) google scholar
  • Busch B and Matthes J, Brexit - The Economic Impact: A Meta-Analysis (IW-Report 10/2016) <https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/157171/1/IW-Report-2016-10.pdf> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 CMA Guidance: Antitrust enforcement if there is no Brexit deal (Competition and Markets Authority Report 30 Ekim 2018) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cmas-role-inantitrust-if-theres-no-brexit-deal/cmas-role-in-antitrust-if-theres-no-brexit-deal erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • CMA Guidance on the functions of the CMA after a no-deal Brexit from the EU (Competition and Markets Authority Report Mart 2019) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/786749/EU_Exit_Guidance_Document_for_No_ Deal_final.pdf erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • Emerson M, Which Model for Brexit? (CEPS Special Report 147/2016) <https://ssrn.com/ abstract=2860010> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • European Parliament The revised Brexit deal: What has changed and next steps? Briefing http:// www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2019/642260/EPRS_BRI(2019)642260_ EN.pdf erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • Gordon R and Moffatt R, Brexit: The Immediate Legal Consequences (The Constitution Society, 2016) <https://consoc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Brexit-PDF.pdf> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar
  • Lowe P, The implications of Brexit for UK and EU Competition Policy and Law Enforcement (Response to BCLWG Issues Paper 2016) <http://www.bclwg.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/ Response-to-BCLWG-Issues-Paper-PL161116.pdf> erişim tarihi 19 Kasım 2019 google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Ayata, Z. (2019). Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları. İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, 77(2), 925-951. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014


AMA

Ayata Z. Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları. İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası. 2019;77(2):925-951. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014


ABNT

Ayata, Z. Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları. İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, [Publisher Location], v. 77, n. 2, p. 925-951, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Ayata, Zeynep,. 2019. “Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları.” İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası 77, no. 2: 925-951. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014


Chicago: Humanities Style

Ayata, Zeynep,. Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları.” İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası 77, no. 2 (Jul. 2022): 925-951. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014


Harvard: Australian Style

Ayata, Z 2019, 'Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları', İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, vol. 77, no. 2, pp. 925-951, viewed 6 Jul. 2022, https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Ayata, Z. (2019) ‘Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları’, İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, 77(2), pp. 925-951. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014 (6 Jul. 2022).


MLA

Ayata, Zeynep,. Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları.” İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası, vol. 77, no. 2, 2019, pp. 925-951. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014


Vancouver

Ayata Z. Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları. İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası [Internet]. 6 Jul. 2022 [cited 6 Jul. 2022];77(2):925-951. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014 doi: 10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014


ISNAD

Ayata, Zeynep. Birleşik Krallık’ın Avrupa Birliği Üyeliğinden Çıkmasının Rekabet Hukuku ve Uygulaması Bakımından Sonuçları ve Açmazları”. İstanbul Hukuk Mecmuası 77/2 (Jul. 2022): 925-951. https://doi.org/10.26650/mecmua.2019.77.2.0014



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim07.08.2019
Son Revizyon05.12.2019
Kabul06.12.2019

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.