Centre for Law, Economics and Society (CLES)


We are currrently developing a new events programme, please bear with us!

For more information and to view past events, please go to the events pages.


Contact Us

For general enquiries, please contact:

Tatjana Wingender
+44 (0)20 3108 8484
t.wingender [at] ucl.ac.uk

For research project enquiries, please contact:

Dr Ioannis Lianos
+44 (0)20 3108 8346
i.lianos [at] ucl.ac.uk


For more working papers, please visit the CLES Research Paper Series section on this website.

Past Events

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

22 June - 23 June 2015
a two-day conference

BRICS Competition Law and Policy
Forum and Workshop

St-Petersburg, Russia

Visit the event website for more information.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

18 June 2015
a one-day CPD course

Getting Merger Control Clearances
for Corporate Deals: EU and Multi-
Jurisdictional Merger Control in Practice


  • Kyriakos Fountoukos (Herbert Smith Freehills LLP)
  • Peter Rowlands  (Herbert Smith Freehills LLP)
  • Nick Root  (Herbert Smith Freehills LLP)
About the course:
Merger control is an essential part of a competition practitioner's every day work and is also of importance to other advisors (corporate lawyers, bankers) involved in transactions. It needs to be considered in every corporate deal including private acquisitions of whole companies, shares or assets, public takeover bids, minority investments in companies and joint venture agreements. This is because merger control will impact key aspects of a transaction: the transaction time table ("when can I close the deal?") and even the "deliverability" of a transaction ("can I do the deal?" "Will remedies be imposed?").

More than 100 countries around the world now have merger control laws. Most of them, like the EU regime, are "mandatory" and "suspensory" regimes: a filing must be made and the deal cannot close before clearance has been receive. from the relevant regulators.

Despite the central importance of merger control for competition lawyers, corporate lawyers, investment bankers and businesses, merger control is a topic that is often not taught in detail and from a hands-on perspective in undergraduate or even post-graduate courses.

With the aid of a practical case study, this course will cover the key basic aspects of what an advisor needs to know from a practical perspective to:
analyse corporate transactions to decide whether a transaction triggers a merger filing requirement with the EU and/or in other jurisdictions around the world;
deal with timelines of each relevant jurisdiction as well as consequences for failure to file (fines, unwinding the transaction etc.) to assess exact possible impact on the transaction;
negotiate corporate documentation such as conditions precedent, cooperation between purchaser and seller in making filings, and conduct pre-completion. The course will also cover other aspects of the corporate documentation relevant to competition law such as exchange of information in the due diligence process (e.g. Non-Disclosure Agreements and clean team processes), non-compete clauses, warranties and indemnities;
prepare an EU merger control filing on Form CO (information needed and process, practical tips); and
guide clients through the procedures for clearance (emphasis on the EU procedure).

The key focus of the course will be on jurisdictional and procedural issues with only a brief discussion of substantive issues (how regulators review a merger from a substantive perspective). The course will aim to give participants the practical experience needed to understand and/or work on merger control aspects of a corporate deal, by simulating as closely as possible the work that a practitioner would undertake in a live transaction.

Who should attend:
The course is mainly designed associates, trainees or prospective trainees wishing to gain practical experience which they can apply in a post with an international law firm doing merger control work. It is also suitable for post-graduate students on competition law or mergers and acquisitions courses.
Attenders need not have day-to-day experience of corporate deals or merger control, however some understanding (academic or practical) of transaction agreements would be useful.

The course is split into two distinct sessions which can be attended independently.
a) The Morning Sessions:  covering where to file and the consequences, and negotiating the corporate documents; and
b) The Afternoon Session: covering drafting filings and procedural aspects of the process.

Visit the event website for more information.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

12 June 2015
a one-day CPD course introducing Chinese anti-Monopoly Law

Competition Law in China

Course leaders:

  • Thomas Cheng
  • Davis Stallibrass

Course Prerequisites:
None, though a good understanding of UK, EU, or US competition law is highly desirable.


A pack with english translations of core legislation, guidance, and decisions will be provided. Students will be expected to have made themselves familiar with it.

About this course:
This six-hour short course will give students an introduction to the Chinese Anti-monopoly Law.
The course will cover all the basic aspects of substantive competition law, including restrictive agreements, abuse of dominance, merger review, IP-competition interface, and an area of competition law unique to China known as abuse of administrative monopoly.
Students will be introduced to the leading cases with reference to both private litigation in the courts and administrative enforcement by state agencies.
The course will seek to highlight the similarities and difference between the Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law and competition law in other jurisdictions, such as the EU and the US. In addition, it will set the Chinese law within the broader context of Chinese political and economic development.
The course will include a discussion of the unique context in which competition law is enforced in China and a critical evaluation of the cause and effect of divergence between Chinese and international competition law norms.

What you will learn:
Students will become familiar with the political economy and institutional environment that contextualises competition law enforcement in China.
Students will understand the basic aspects of all areas of substantive competition law, including restrictive agreements, abuse of dominance, merger review, IP-competition interface, and an area of competition law unique to China known as abuse of administrative monopoly.
Students will be introduced to leading cases with reference to both private litigation in the courts and administrative enforcement by state agencies.
Students will acquire a greater appreciation of the development of competition law in China in the context of the global debate about and movement toward convergence.

Visit the event website for more information.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

10 June - 11 June 2015
a 2-day CPD course

Innovation, Competition Law and IP Rights

Professor Herbert Hovenkamp,
University of Iowa School of Law and Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Visiting Professor, UCL

The course was accredited with 12 CPD hours by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Bar Standards Board. It also constitutes relevant CPD for IPReg.

About the course:
The course explored the interaction between competition law and intellectual property rights. In the modern knowledge economy undertakings develop a number of strategies to expand their IP rights portfolio and achieve competitive advantages by employing their IP rights in order to exclude competitors or raise their costs, and charge higher prices to consumers. Competition law and IP law disputes are interconnected, as recent litigation in the pharmaceutical sector and the recent patent wars in the IT sector illustrate.

The course analyzed the value of competition law in addressing a variety of practices in innovation-intensive markets, including interconnection in networks, duties to deal, the licensing and distribution of IP rights (standard setting organizations, patent pools), tying, patent assertions by non-practising entities, pay-for-delay (“reverse”) settlements, and the nature of FRAND obligations for standards essential patents (SEPs), as well as injunctive remedies and computation of FRAND royalties, drawing from examples mostly from US law.

The course considered the uses and limitations of competition law and policy as a vehicle for promoting innovation and will examine realistic reforms that can be undertaken in IP law and competition law in order to achieve this objective. The course aimed to examine the interaction between competition law and IP law in various sectors of the economy and the practical implications of that interaction for a number of commercial practices.

The course primarily examined the US systems for competition law and intellectual property rights.
Course outline:
Wednesday 10 June
(AM): Competition Policy, The Patent System, and Unreasonable IP Exclusions
(including anticompetitive abuses of the patent system, refusal to license, restraints on innovation, nonuse, patent aggregators and other non-practicing entities; exclusion by innovation)
(PM): Reverse Payment Settlements, Tying, and “Misuse”
(including pay-for delay settlements, patent ties, interoperability, price discrimination)

Thursday 11 June
(AM): Innovation Policy and the Innovation Commons
(including patent pools and cross licensing, open source practices, price fixing and horizontal market restraints, joint ventures)
(PM): Standard Setting, Standards Essential Patents, and FRAND Licensing
(including standard setting and other forms of technology sharing, FRAND licensing obligations and remedies, including royalty determinations).

Visit the event website for more information.
UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

9 June 2015

Meet the Author: The Opening of American Law – Neoclassical Legal Thought, 1870-1970

Professor Herbert Hovenkamp (University of Iowa/Visiting Professor at UCL Laws)

Professor Ioannis Lianos (UCL Laws)
About the book:
Two Victorian Era intellectual movements changed the course of American legal thought: Darwinian natural selection and marginalist economics. The two movements rested on fundamentally inconsistent premises.
Darwinism emphasized instinct, random selection, and determinism. Marginalism emphasised rational choice. Legal theory managed to accommodate both, although to different degrees in different disciplines.
The two movements also developed mutually exclusive scientific methodologies. Darwinism emphasizing external indicators of welfare such as productivity, education or health, while marginalists emphasized market choice. Historians have generally exaggerated the role of Darwinism in American legal thought, while understating the role of marginalist economics.
This book explores these issues in several legal disciplines. One is Progressive Era movements for redistributive policies about taxation and public goods. Darwinian science also dominated the law of race relations, while criminal law reflected an inconsistent mixture of Darwinian and marginalist incentive-based theories.
The common law, including family law, contract, property, and tort, moved from emphasis on correction of past harms to management of ongoing risk and relationship.
A chapter on Legal Realism emphasizes the Realists’ indebtedness to institutional economics, a movement that powerfully influenced American legal theory long after it fell out of favour with economists. Five chapters on the corporation, innovation and competition policy show how marginalist economics transformed business policy. The ironic exception was patent law, which developed in relative insulation from economic concerns about innovation policy.
The book concludes with three chapters on public law, emphasizing the role of institutionalist economics in policy making during and after the New Deal. A lengthy epilogue then explores the variety of postwar attempts to reconstruct a defensible and more market-oriented rule of law after the decline of Legal Realism and the New Deal.
The book explores a broad spectrum of American legal history over a century during which the law explicitly turned to social science and economics for its sources. Hovenkamp addresses topical issues including wealth distribution, tax policy, the role of corporations, and the legacy of the New Deal.

The Opening of American Law – Neoclassical Legal Thought, 1870-1970 is published by Oxford University Press.

Visit the event website for more information.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

20 May 2015
A one-day CPD course

Recent Developments in Latin American Antitrust

Prof. Ioannis Lianos (UCL)


  • Julián Peña – Allende & Brea Abogados
  • Sebastián Castro Quiroz – Oxford
  • Juan David Gutierrez – Oxford
  • Andrés Palacios Lleras – UCL
  • Murilo Lubambo de Melo – UCL

    Latin-American Antitrust panel - May 2015
About the course:
Antitrust regimes in Latin American have undergone considerable changes in the last two and a half decades. The more recent reforms that have taken place in the last years aim to improve the effectiveness of the enforcement agencies as they investigate and prosecute anticompetitive conducts. They introduce or amend the leniency regimes, increase monetary fines and extend criminal liability to some anticompetitive conducts like hard-core cartels. Even so, it is not clear that these new reforms, or their predecessors, bridge the differences that distinguish the regimes themselves. Some important differences have been furthered, including those related with the administrative or judicial nature of the enforcement authorities or the evidentiary standards required for proving certain conducts. Hence, it may well be that these recent reforms accentuate the differences between these regimes rather than making them more congenial.

In this event we wanted to address these reforms and discuss how take place and why. On one hand, these reforms can be taken as mere examples of the diffusion of antitrust institutions and theories developed elsewhere and that find their ways into Latin American legal regimes. If this is so, we would like to address how this diffusion process takes place and, if possible, discus about the roles that lawyers, economists and consultants play in these developments. On the other, they can be taken as a new chapter that evidences the commitment of local politics with protecting competition. Contrary to previous reforms, these are being discussed with the civil society and are submitted for their enactment and approval to politically accountable bodies. If so, we would like to address the pillars of the political support given to competition in general and to the particular content of these reforms in particular. Perhaps the efforts to acclimatize antitrust have rendered positive fruits, both at the level of everyday politics as well as at the structure of the different professions that interact in this field of law.

Visit the course website for more information.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

13 May 2015

The Role of Cost-Benefit Analysis in the U.S. Regulatory System

Howard Shelanski (Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, The White House)


  • Michael Gibbons OBE (Chairman, Regulatory Policy Committee, UK)
  • Adam Jasser (President, Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, Poland; previously Secretary of State in the Chancellery of Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland responsible for better regulation)
  • Professor Claudio Radaelli (Anniversary Chair in Politics, Director of the Centre for European Governance, Jean Monnet Chair in Political Economy, University of Exeter)

Professor Ioannis Lianos (Chair in Global Competition Law and Public Policy; Director, UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society)

Cost-benefit analysis in the US regulatory system - May 2015
About the event:
This presentation examined how regulatory impact analyses (RIAs), and cost-benefit analysis in particular, factors into the development and review of federal regulations in the United States. It discussed the circumstances under which agencies must prepare RIAs and how the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) uses RIAs in its assessment of significant federal rules. The presentation then discussed the quantification of costs and benefits, and both the limits and appropriate uses of such quantification in regulatory policy. The presentation concluded by discussing several challenges confronting the assessment of regulatory impacts and suggest avenues for future policy development.

The commentator discussion that followed Professor Shelanski’s talk provided a comparison with the relevant practice in the UK, the European Union and other Member States.The recent focus on regulatory cooperation and convergence in the context of the negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), in particular the Section on regulatory cooperation include provisions on impact assessments for planned regulatory acts, suggesting impacts to examine (for instance, impact on international trade or investment) and proposing procedural or transparency obligations. Hence, understanding the role of cost benefit analysis in the US policy-making, as well as of course the role of the tool of impact assessments in policy decision-making in the EU and EU Member States is essential in order for the transatlantic regulatory cooperation to work.

Visit the event website for more information.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

30 April 2015

TTIP/CETA Brainstorming Workshop

Attendance was by invitation only

About the workshop:

The workshop aimed to bring together a number of colleagues working on different areas covered by the TTIP and CETA, in particular the following four: (a) Trade law, (b) Regulation, (c) Labour law, healthcare and other forms of social regulation, (d) Investment Treaties/International Dispute Resolution. These different "tribes" are all to a certain extent interested in the TTIP and CETA, although each of them has so far, it seems to us, explored these arrangements from their own perspective. We also thought that there was an urgent need for some detached (from specific interests) academic perspective on the TTIP and CETA, as most of the commentary published is initiated by those involved in the negotiations and/or representing the views of specific interests.

Visit the event website for more information.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

11 March 2015

More Than Money: The Economics of Payments and Its Regulation

Speaker: Professor David Evans, University College London

Accreditation: This CPD course was accredited with 4.5 CPD hours the SRA / BSB

About the course:
The payments industry is going through a period of significant disruption. Innovation is creating new opportunities, but also risk, for payments companies. At the same time new and proposed regulations are forcing traditional firms to change how they do business and putting up roadblocks to startups. Meanwhile the lines between the payments industry and others is blurring as high technology companies from Apple to Uber are inserting themselves into the mix. What does this mix of innovation and regulation mean for payments companies and the lawyers who represent them?

This course examined the organisation of the modern payments industry with particular focus on the economics of this industry including the role of multi-sided platforms and the behavioural economics of payments and borrowing; examined key innovations including mobile money, virtual currencies, and the integration of virtual and physical payments; and examined the economic foundations of competition policy and consumer protection for payments.

The course included presentations from several executives of payments companies including startups.

Read more about the course.

Download the course brochure.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

4 February 2015

The Microsoft Antitrust Cases: Retrospective and prospective


  • Professor Ioannis Lianos, UCL


  • Andrew I. Gavil, Professor, Howard University School of Law and former Director Office of Policy Planning at Federal Trade Commission
  • Harry First, Charles L. Denison Professor of Law, Co-Director Competition, Innovation, and Information Law Program at the New York University School of Law


  • Christian Ahlborn, Partner, Linklaters
  • Ian S. Forrester, Partner, White & Case
  • Judge Nicholas Forwood, General Court of the EU (TBC)
  • Thomas Vinje, Partner, Clifford Chance

Accreditation: This event was accredited with 2.5 CPD hours with the SRA / BSB

About the event:
The Microsoft antitrust saga has been a defining moment in the evolution of US and European competition law in the era of post-1990s information and Internet revolution. Its influence on the design of modern competition law standards for monopolization/abuse of dominance has been remarkable. In addition to its economic significance, the case has also provided one of the first examples of the challenges that globalization and the diffusion of competition law set to competition law enforcement, including the need to manage the interaction between various institutions of enforcement at a global scale. In their remarkable study of the Microsoft antitrust cases, Professors Andrew I. Gavil and Harry First provide extremely valuable insights into the significance of this case for competition law and policy in the 21st century. The conference provided an opportunity to engage with the argument of the authors and hear from some key players in the development of the Microsoft cases their retrospective on the case and their prospective analysis on its implications for competition law enforcement.

Read more about the event.

Overview Gavil & First, The Microsoft Antitrust Case

First and Gavil, Slides from the event


First and Gavil, Lessons from the Microsoft Antitrust Cases

Economides and Lianos, A Critical Appraisal of Remedies in the EU Microsoft Cases

Economides and Lianos, The Elusive Antitrust Standard on Bundling in Europe and in the United States in the Aftermath of the Microsoft Cases

Excepts from the Microsoft on Trial book:
a) chapter 1: The Basic Technology Issues by Colin Jackson
b) chapter 3: Victa Placet Mihi Causa: The Compulsory Licensing Part of the Microsoft Case by Ian S. Forrester QC

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

3 February 2015

The Challenging Nature of Cartel Criminalisation: A Case Study of the UK

Speaker: Dr Peter Whelan, University of Leeds

Accreditation: This event was accredited with 1 CPD hour with the SRA (BSB pending)

About this lecture:
There is a growing tendency within the EU to criminalise ‘hard core’ cartel activity. One of the EU Member States that currently imposes criminal sanctions (imprisonment) for cartel activity is the UK. Although the Cartel Offence has been on the UK legislative books for more than ten years, efforts to enforce it to date have been subjected to considerable criticism. The UK Government recently conceded that enforcement of the Cartel Offence had been ineffective and that legislative change was required in order to reform the Cartel Offence so that it would become fit for purpose. Following a lengthy consultation process, legislative reform of the Cartel Offence was undertaken. On 1 April 2014, Section 47 of the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 entered into force, ensuring significant changes to the criminal UK Cartel Offence. Dr Whelan’s presentation examined in detail the specific reforms of the Cartel Offence and argued that, although considerable improvement has been made, the UK authorities currently have at their disposal a criminal offence that is fundamentally flawed and unworkable in practice. He therefore argued that further reform is advised.

Whelan - The Challenging Nature of Cartel Criminalisation slides

Read more about the event.
9 December 2014

Special guest lecture
Recent Developments in US Antitrust Law

Speaker: Renata Hesse (Deputy Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division)

About the speaker:

Renata B. Hesse is Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Criminal and Civil Operations at the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division. From November 16, 2012, until the confirmation of Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer, Ms. Hesse served as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division. She rejoined the Antitrust Division in March of 2012, having previously served in several different capacities at the Division between 1997 and 2006. Immediately prior to returning to the Division, Ms. Hesse served as Senior Counsel to the Chairman for Transactions at the Federal Communications Commission, where she oversaw the Commission’s investigation of AT&T’s proposed acquisition of T-Mobile. Before that, Ms. Hesse was a partner in the Washington, DC office of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. Ms. Hesse has been recognized in Chambers USA: America’s Leading Business Lawyers (2007- 2011), The International Who’s Who of Competition Lawyers & Economists (2009-2011), and received the Attorney General’s Distinguished Service Award in 2005.

Visit the event page

29 October 2014

Multi-Sided Platforms: Business, Economics & Competition Policy

Accreditation: The event was accredited with 4.5 CPD hours by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Bar Standards Board.

A 5 hour CPD course
About this CPD course:

Multi-sided platforms (also known as “two-sided markets”) are businesses that act as intermediaries between several interdependent groups of customers. They are central to many important industries including the online, payments, financial exchanges, and media. They are often at the center of debates concerning competition policy and sectoral regulation. This course covered the unique business models followed by multi-sided businesses; the economics of multi-sided platforms and the industries they anchor; the application of competition policy to multi-sided platforms; a survey of key competition policy and regulatory matters involving these platforms; and tools and techniques for competition policy analysis of these platforms.

Download the course brochure

16 June 2014

Consensual Antitrust in High Tech Markets

Accreditation: The event was accredited with 2.5 CPD hours by the SRA & BSB

About this event:

This event will examine the propensity of EU competition law and US antitrust law to a certain degree to avoid adjudication of competition law disputes in the high tech sector and proceed with either consent decrees, settlements or commitment decisions. The recent Google case will be discussed and we will try to analyse the implications of such choice for competition law and the underlying role of economic analysis and economic consultants in this context.

Visit the event page

11 & 12 June 2014

Innovation, Competition and IP Rights

Professor Herbert Hovenkamp, University of Iowa School of Law

Accreditation: This course was accredited with 12 CPD hours by the SRA and BSB

A 12 hour CPD course

About this CPD course:

The course explored the interaction between competition law and intellectual property rights. In the modern knowledge economy undertakings develop a number of strategies to expand their IP rights portfolio and achieve competitive advantages by employing their IP rights in order to exclude competitors or raise their costs, and charge higher prices to consumers. The course aimed to examine the interaction between competition law and IP law in various sectors of the economy and the practical implications of that interaction for a number of commercial practices.

Visit the event page

7 June 2014

Themes in Competition Law Enforcement

About this workshop:

The workshop was attended by eminent competition law judges, academics, practitioners, lawyers and economists. Organized by the Centre for Law, Economics and Society at UCL and IMEDIPA, the workshop explored the challenges raised by the recent adoption of the EU Directive on actions for damages for competition law infringements and the important topic of consumer participation in EU competition law policy.

6 June 2014

New Challenges in Competition Law Enforcement

About this conference:

This conference brought together world-leading antitrust specialists from the fields of law and economics to explore, in 5 panels, the most important topics in recent competition law practice.

The panels covered:

•The object / effect distinction in competition law
•Due process in competition law
•Economics analysis and oligopoly in competition law
•Competition law in times of crisis and recent developments (Authorities roundtable)
•Anticompetitive practices involving IP rights

A 10 hour CPD course taught over 3 weeks:
24, 25 & 31 March and 1 & 7 April 2014

The Evolving Jurisprudence of Vertical Restraints

Professor William Comanor (University of California, Santa Barbara and Los Angeles)

Accreditation: This event was accredited with 10 CPD hours by the SRA and BSB.

About the CPD course:

This course explored the evolving jurisprudence of vertical restraints and their relation to developments in economic analysis and doctrine. As economic judgments have changed, so have legal outcomes. However, this process has been uneven, and differences between legal and economic constructs continue to exist. 

By the end of the course students had an understanding of the law and economics of vertical restraints and were enabled to critically engage with the latest economic commentary on this topic. Students also had an overview of the most recent case law and statutory materials from the topic area.

Visit the event page

3 March 2014

Competition Law in Chile: Challenges and Prospects

Mr Felipe Irarrázabal (Professor of Economic Law, School of Law of Universidad de Chile)

Accreditation: This event was accredited with 1 CPD hour by the SRA and BSB.

About this event:

The talk focused on the challenges that a competition agency in a small country with a transitional economy must face, to produce changes on the long-term, with a description of the evolution of institutions and stakeholders involved in the decision-making process. Emphasis was placed on concrete experiences of Chile and in the context of Latin America.

Visit the event page

UCL Britain & Europe Series

The Single Market and liberalisation, harmonisation and mutual recognition: Time to rethink the balance of competences between the EU and the member states?

Speakers: Professor Kenneth Armstrong, University of Cambridge; Professor Kalypso Nicolaidis, University of Oxford; and Professor Stephen Weatherill, University of Oxford
Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos, Reader in Economics and Competition Law, UCL

27 November 2013

About this event:
The establishment of a (single) internal market has been a major ambition and one of the most important achievements of the project of European integration. The interplay of the principles of market liberalisation, harmonization and mutual recognition, has been an essential feature of the European Internal Market law and policy. The recent financial and economic crisis may have tested some of the achievements of the European integration project although this has not yet led to a resurgence of the protectionist policies of the past. The economic and social crisis that followed raises questions over the costs and benefits for each jurisdiction of the Single Market, in particular because of the important trade imbalances between Member States of the EU, some of which enjoy a significant trade surplus, while others record trade deficits. The panel will delve into these governance aspects of the Single Market project and their underlying politics. It will also discuss the findings and proposals of the recent Single Market Report – Review of the Balance of Competences, released in July 2013 by the British Government, which examines the balance of competences between the European Union and the United Kingdom in the area of the Single Market and explores the impact of the Single Market on the UK national interest.

Visit the event website.

 UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

New Challenges in EU Competition Law and Enforcement

About this event:
EU competition law is in constant evolution. The most remarkable recent developments have occurred in the context of the interpretation by the courts of Article 102 TFEU, as well as the recent proposal for a Damages directive and the way private enforcement of EU competition law will interact with public enforcement. Recent cases of the Court of Justice of the EU have challenged the options promoted by the proposed Damages Directive, while the important fines and far reaching remedies imposed or negotiated by the European Commission have yet again raised the issue of any existing boundaries to its discretion in this area. A panel of distinguished speakers from academia and practice will comment on the most recent developments in EU competition law and will provide their critical perspectives on the way ahead.

13 November 2013

Visit the event website.
Session I: Abuse of Dominant Position

Chair: Damien Geradin (Tilburg, George Mason; Covington & Burling LLP)

Speakers: Alison Jones (King's College London), Renato Nazzini (King's College London), Lisa Lovdhal Gormsen (University of Manchester), Andrea Coscelli (Ofcom)

Download Jones slides (PDF)

Download Gormsen slides (PDF)

Download Coscelli slides (PDF)

Session II: The Interaction Between Public Enforcement and Actions for Damages in Europe

Chair: Judge Nicholas Forwood (General Court of the EU)

Speakers: Mark Powell (White & Case), John Temple Lang (Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton), John Kallaugher (Latham & Watkins), Andreas Stephan (University of East Anglia)

Download Kallaugher slides (PDF)

Download Stephan slides (PDF)

Session III: Sanctions and Remedies : Between Proportionality and Optimal Enforcement Theory

Chair: Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

Speakers: Damien Geradin (Tilburg, George Mason; Covington), Nicholas Khan (European Commission, Legal Service),  Ioannis Lianos (UCL), Frank Maier-Rigaud (IESEG)

Download Geradin slides (PDF)

Download Lianos slides (PDF)

Download Maier-Rigaud slides (PDF)
UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

CPD course on Innovation, Competition Law and IP Rights

Speaker: Professor Herbert Hovenkamp, University of Iowa School of Law and Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences

A 16 hour CPD course taught over 4 weeks:
12 & 13 June and 18 & 19 June

About the CPD course:
In the modern knowledge economy companies are striving to achieve competitive advantage by expanding their IP rights portfolio. For this companies are employing IP as a way to harm their competitors or as a monetary exchange in IP related transactions. However as recent litigation in the pharmaceutical sector demonstrates competition law and IP law disputes are interconnected. This course will analyse the value of competition law in addressing a variety of practices used in innovation-intensive markets. These include the interconnection of networks, ‘duties to deal’, the licensing and distribution of IP rights (standard setting organisations and patent pools) and reverse settlements as adopted by firms active in the manufacturing and delivery of services or non-practising entities, drawing from examples in both EU and US law. The course will also consider the uses and limitations of competition law and policy as a vehicle for promoting innovation. It will also examine realistic reforms that can be undertaken in IP law and competition law across various sectors of the economy as well as the practical implications of that interaction for a number of commercial practices.

Visit the event website.

Download the course brochure.
UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

The Limits of Competition Law in Latin America: A Conversation with Julián Peña

19 June 2013
About this event:
As Latin America continues to thrive amidst the global economic downturn, the quality of competition law regimes and industrial policies has been the subject of recent discussions and political activities. The increasing internationalisation of Latin American firms and shifting political scenarios are testing the adequacy of the competition law regimes in this region. The time is ripe for a thoughtful discussion about what Latin America has achieved so far and the changes to be implemented regarding the protection and promotion of competition.

Julian Peña, one of the leading experts in this topic, will join us for a conversation about the current state of competition law in Latin America. He will present his latest work "The Limits of Competition Law in Latin America", recently published in "The Global Limits of Competition Law" (Ioannis Lianos & Daniel Sokol, Eds.).
UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Theory and Practice of Regulatory Impact Assessments in Europe: A Comparative and Interdisciplinary Perspective

10 June 2013

Venue: Ecole Nationale d'Administration (ENA) in Paris, France
About the conference:
The main goal of this conference is to portray and analyze the development of the use of Impact Assessments throughout the European Union and its member States as a standard of good governance and, in some cases, as a legal standard which imposes constraints on the administrative action, regulatory or legislative actions. Admittedly, this tool has long been used and known especially in the field of environmental law or public health and the idea is not foreign to the use of economic record in a number of areas of public economic law. Impact assessment forms inherent part of the rise of the “Better Regulation” movement in Europe and the adoption of a number of tools with the aim to measure (Standard Cost Model) and reduce administrative burdens or to evaluate the impact of public policies.
The conference aims to examine in a comparative and interdisciplinary perspective the implementation of impact assessment in the European Union (EU) and Member States of the EU.
The conference will also be an opportunity to present the first empirical results of the joint project of Ecole Nationale d’Administration (ENA) Gutenberg chair and the Centre for Law, Economics and Society (CLES) at University College London (UCL) on Regulatory Impact Assessments in Europe.
The conference will provide a practical and theoretical perspective on this fascinating and emergent topic with the participation of leading experts from Europe and the United States.

Visit the event website.
UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Claims for Damages in Competition and IP Law. Legal Framework and Economic Principles for the Evaluation of Damages

Speakers: Vincent Smith (Sheppard and Smith) and Peter Davis (CompassLexecon)

A 10 hour CPD course taught over 4 weeks:
on 15 & 22 May and 3 & 10 June 2013

About the CPD course:
The course will examine the legal framework for claims for damages in EU and UK competition law as well as in intellectual property law and the economic principles for the evaluation of damages in these contexts. The topic is of particular importance in view of the increasing numbers of competition law claims for damages in the UK, the harmonization initiatives at the EU level, the recent reforms envisaged in UK competition law promoting private enforcement and the importance of damages claims for infringement of IP rights, in view of the issues raised by other forms of protection of IP rights, such as injunctions.

Visit the event website.

Download the course brochure.

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Annual Competition Law in Context Conference on:
Evidence in Competition Law Proceedings. A Comparative Perspective

5 June 2013

About the conference:
This conference examined the topic of Competition Law Evidence, including the way competition law evidence is collected and assessed by competition authorities in Europe and in the US and the increasing role of the judiciar. It discussed practical issues relating to the standard of proof, the differences between adversarial and inquisitorial processes, the limits to evidence gathering set by the Legal Professional Privilege, the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination and rights of defense in general. The conference also shed light on an unexplored but fascinating area of law enforcement. The speakers, global leaders in this field of law, came from the judiciary, competition authorities, academia and practice.

Panel 1: Economic evidence and public enforcement of competition law
Chair: Ioannis Lianos (UCL)
Robert Stillman (CRA)
Katy Collyer (OFT)
Kai-Uwe Kuhn (European Commission)
Howard Shelanski (US Federal Trade Commission)

Panel 2: How much is enough? Standard of proof and cogency of evidence in competition law
Chair: Judge Douglas Ginsburg (DC Circuit, Court of Appeals)
David Bailey (Brick Court Chambers)
Sir Christopher Bellamy (Linklaters)
Christian Ewald (Bundeskartellamt)
Ioannis Lianos (UCL)
Nigel Parr (Ashurst)

Panel 3: Limitations to evidence gathering (e.g. Legal privileges)
Chair: Ioannis Lianos (UCL)
Antonio Bavasso (Allen & Overy, UCL)
Cerry Darbon (Liberty Global Media)
Marc Hansen (Latham & Watkins)
Paul Lasok (Monckton Chambers)
Florian Wagner von Papp (UCL)

Panel 4: Economic evidence and the judiciary
Chair: Judge Frederic Jenny (OECD, OFT, ESSEC, UCL)
Judge Douglas Ginsburg (DC Circuit,  Court of Appeals)
Herbert Hovenkamp (University of Iowa, School of Law)
Judge Frederic Jenny (OECD, OFT, ESSEC, UCL)
Mr Justice Roth (Competition Appeal Tribunal)
James Flynn QC (Brick Court Chambers)

Visit the event website.
Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Enforcement Aspects of American Antitrust Law

4 Week CPD course: Wednesday 6 February, 20 February, 6 March and 20 March 2013

Speakers: Professor Joseph P. Bauer (Notre Dame Law School)
About this course:
This mini-course ran over four 2-hour sessions during February and March 2013. It considered the variety of issues raised by the availability of civil damages for successful plaintiffs, including the various methodologies for the calculation of base amounts; potential limitations on the amount of damages; and contribution for damages among co-defendants.This mini-course examined this structural landscape. Particular attention was given to the civil side, in which plaintiffs seek monetary relief. Case law under the antitrust laws has imposed numerous procedural barriers to bringing a successful action. The plaintiff must have standing to bring the lawsuit, and it must show that it suffered an "antitrust injury." One particularly important facet of these requirements in the so-called Illinois Brick rule, which provides that only a "direct purchaser" from the defendant may maintain an action for damages.

Visit the event website.

Download the course brochure.

The Social Media Research Initiative at the Centre for Law, Economics and Society at UCL Laws (SMRI@CLES)

Regulating Social Networks: More Harm than Good?

31 January 2013

A debate on how social networks challenge the traditional views about regulation and its aims.

Panellists included:

  • Mark Williamson (Director of Artist Services at Spotify)
  • Ian Hogarth (Co-Founder and CEO, Songkick)
  • Prof. Andrew Murray (London School of Economics)
  • Tom Frederikse (Clintons LLP)
  • Mark Adams (UK Director, The Audience)
  • Martin Adams (SMRI@CLES)
  • Steven Braines (Artist Manager)
  • Ioannis Lianos (Director, UCL CLES)
About this event:
The effect of the spread of social media has been dramatic; altering the power dynamic between consumers and providers of goods and services, disrupting traditional business models, undermining intellectual property rights, enabling cultural participation, and facilitating a more democratic flow of information.

On January 31, 2013 UCL Laws played host to a fascinating exchange between leading thinkers involved in the industry and policy surrounding social media.

The discussion asked important questions about social media, and specifically social networks, and the impact of attempts to protect individual privacy, intellectual property, and other public interests. What is the value of social media to our cultural, social and professional lives? What interests are states seeking to protect when they discuss legal regulation of these technologies? Should we decide that regulation is appropriate, on what basis and rationale can this based upon? Do strict legal standards threaten to stifle the continued development of these innovative technologies? Does it make sense to consider self regulation here? This event will be of interest to industry leaders in this important area, and a range of students and faculty from diverse departments including law, public policy, and computer science.

Visit the event website.

Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Competition Law and Intellectual Property Rights: Whose Balance of Innovation and Incentives?

14 January 2013

Speakers: The Hon. Mr Justice Barling (President, Competition Appeal Tribunal), Prof. Sir Robin Jacob (UCL), Giovanni Pitruzzella (Chairman, Italian Competition Authority), Howard Shelanski (Director, US Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Economics), Amelia Fletcher (OFT) and many others

About this event:
This event explored the tension between competition law and intellectual property law and will look at the different focuses on static versus dynamic efficiencies. It explored the differences from the view points of the courts, IP authorities and competition authorities.

Visit the event website.
Thursday 6 December 2012

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

The Present and Future of Behavioural Antitrust

The Hon Mr Justice Barling (President, Competition Appeal Tribunal), Dr Amelia Fletcher (OFT), Dr Andrea Coscelli (OFCOM), Dr Cristina Caffarra (CRA), Dr Peter Davies (Compass Lexecon), Paolo Siciliani (Chief Economist, BBC Trust), Prof. Christopher Leslie (University of California at Irvine School of Law), Prof. Maurice Stucke (University of Tennessee), John Kirkpatrick (UK Competition Commission), Prof. Avishalom Tor (Notre Dame Law School) and Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

About the event:
Behavioural antitrust—the application to antitrust analysis of empirical evidence of common deviations of human behavior from strict rationality—is increasingly popular and hotly debated by competition law scholars and the enforcement agencies in the U.K, the EU more generally, and the U.S. alike. This timely conference will bring together leading experts in the field to examine the state-of-the-art of the behavioral approach to competition law and policy and to consider its future potential and limitations as an antitrust methodology.

Visit the event website.

Tuesday 13 November 2012

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Antitrust Policy Towards Resale Price Maintenance following Leegin and ebooks: A US, UK and EU Comparative Competition Law Perspective

Keynote: Prof. William S Comanor (University of California)

Commentators: Dr Nelson Jung (UK Office of Fair Trading), Dr Abel Mateus (EBRD / UCL), Professor Alison Jones (KCL) and Dr Antonio Bavasso (UCL / Allen & Overy LLP)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

About this event:
On June 28, 2007, the US Supreme Court announced its decision in Leegin to revoke a 96-year precedent on the appropriate antitrust treatment of Resale Price Maintenance (RPM). Vertical price restraints such as RPM would be evaluated not as a per se offence but under the Rule of Reason. Applying the new standard, both the pro-competitive and anti-competitive dimensions of any particular restraint would be evaluated and balanced against each other, and that only those where the anti-competitive effects predominate would violate the antitrust laws. This event explores both the law and economies of the new directives, and also review the first lower court decision dealing with these matters. Discussions will also focus on the application of competition law to RPM in Europe (EU and the UK) in various contexts, including selective distribution and commercial agency agreements.

Visit the event website.

Monday 12 November 2012

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Mergers and Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry

Speaker: Prof. William S Comanor (University of California)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

About this lecture:
The pharmaceutical industry has encountered a period of dramatic structural change. While industry leaders explain their mergers as a response to these shocks and a partial solution to the declining productivity problem, this lecture advances the reverse hypothesis: that instead of enhancing R&D productivity, the merger wave has jeopardized it. The central thesis emphasizes the uncertainties inevitably encountered in new drug discovery and development and the role of "parallel paths" -- i.e., the pursuit of multiple approaches to solving any given medical problem -- in coping with those uncertainties.

Visit the event website.
Friday 19 October 2012, one day conference

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society and Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies, Loyola University Chicago School of Law

Brands, Competition and the Law - Part II

Speakers: Deven Desai (Thomas Jefferson Law School), Kirsten Edwards-Warren (UK Office of Fair Trading), Phil Evans, (FIPRA International), Warren Grimes, (Southwestern), Greg Gundlach (University of North Florida), James Langenfeld (Navigent Consulting), Ioannis Lianos (UCL), Deborah Majorus (Proctor & Gamble), Mark McKenna (Notre Dame Law School), John D. Mittelstaedt (University of Wyoming College of Business), John Noble (British Brands Group), Barak Orbach (University of Arizona), Joan Phillips (Loyola University Chicago), Matthew Sag (Loyola University Chicago), Eliot Schreiber (COO Cloverleaf Innovation), Spencer Weber Waller (Loyola University Chicago)

Venue: Loyola University Chicago
About this conference:
This the second jointly organised conference on Brands, Competition and the Law - the first was held at UCL in December 2011. The aim of this conference is to reflect on the legal, business, and economic understanding of brands by explaining what brands are, how they function, and the role brands play in business competition. The conference will also delve into specific issues raised by branding in the 21st century business competition, such as the challenges raised by online business and the increasing role of private labels in distribution.

Visit the event website.

Wednesday 10 October 2012

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Sport and Competition Law: Recent Developments and Unfinished Business

Speaker: Dr Ben Van Rompuy (T.M.C Asser Institute)

Commentator: Nicholas Green QC (Brick Court Chambers)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

Sport and competition lawSport and competition law 2Sport and competition law 3
About this debate:
As a corollary to the growing commercialization of professional sport, sports-related activities have progressively become the subject of competition law investigations. Sport and competition law still have an uneasy relationship, however.

While the European Commission’s competition decisions in the area of sport have set out broad principles, many questions regarding how to take the specific characteristics of sport and its societal function into account in competition law enforcement remain unsettled.

Since the decentralization of EU competition law enforcement in 2004, enforcement activity in this area has largely shifted to the national level. As a result, all stakeholders (sports organisations, rights owners, clubs, sports practitioners, etc.) increasingly need to learn and draw from national cases and enforcement decisions.

The speaker will address the complexity of balancing sporting and commercial interests under EU competition law, focusing on outstanding issues and options relating to the marketing and exploitation of sports broadcasting rights, in particular joint selling, joint buying, and access to content by consumers.

Download the presentation.

Visit the event website.

Wednesday 23 May 2012

IUS Commune

Macroeconomic Co-operation and International Law

Speaker: Professor Eric Posner (Univ of Chicago)

Chair: Professor Philippe Sands QC (UCL)
About this lecture:
The macroeconomic policies of states can produce significant harms and benefits for other states, yet international macroeconomic cooperation has been one of the weakest areas of international law. The lecture asked why states have had such trouble cooperating over macroeconomic issues, when they have been relatively successful at cooperation over related issues like trade.

Visit the event website.

Thursday 3 May 2012

IUS Commune

The Proliferation of Preferential Trade Agreements: The Beginning of the End of the Multilateral Trading System?

Speaker: Professor Michael Trebilcock (University of Toronto Law School)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

About this lecture:
The moribund state of Doha Round WTO negotiations has heightened concerns about the impact of preferential trade agreements (PTAs) on the progress of global trade liberalization. PTAs have proliferated over the past two decades. There are approximately 300 PTAs now in force, and all but one WTO member is now party to a PTA. The nature of PTAs is also rapidly evolving, with agreements encompassing issue areas beyond WTO commitments and increasingly involving developing countries.

Compared with an ideal world of multilateral free trade, the welfare implications of PTAs are deeply troubling. However, considered in the actual context of persistent barriers to global trade, the theoretical and empirical literature is ambivalent on whether PTAs enhance or detract from global welfare. This is an issue unlikely to be resolved, and the debate has now moved beyond whether PTAs should be categorically opposed. PTAs are firmly entrenched in the law and politics of international trade. The question is how the relationship between these two modes of trade liberalization can best be managed to enhance complementarities and minimize conflicts.

The paper identifies key challenges to multilateralism posed by the growing number and changing nature of PTAs. Lessons are drawn from the international investment regime, where, in the absence of a comprehensive multilateral treaty governing investment, over 2600 bilateral investment treaties (BITs) have been formed in the past 20 years. Recommendations are made for reform at the WTO and in the institutional design of PTAs, with a view to safeguarding the multilateral trading system in the context of PTA proliferation.

Visit the event website.

Tuesday 21 February 2012

IUS Commune

How Constitutions Change: Some Surprising Findings

Speaker: Professor Carlo Fusaro (University of Florence)

Chair: Professor Dawn Oliver (UCL)
About this lecture:
Professor Dawn Oliver of UCL and Professor Carlo Fusaro of the University of Florence recently completed a project in which they compared the ways in which fourteen broadly liberal constitutions, and the EU 'constitution', change. The results are published in How Constitutions Change (Hart Publishing, 2011). Constitutional change can come about in a surprisingly wide range of ways: not only as a result of formal constitutional amendment procedures such as special majorities in the Parliament or referendums, but as a result of changes in the standing orders of parliaments, decisions by the courts, some of which have been rather revolutionary, changes in conventions or governmental praxis, informal agreements between constitutional bodies, or in the form of soft law - codes, guidance, protocols. Lessons can be taken from this project as to the conditions in which constitutional change can or cannot take place and the implications if the political culture in a country makes formal change impossible.

Visit the event website.

Thursday 2 February 2012

IUS Commune

Global Administrative Law and Global Governance: The Normative Agenda

Speaker: Professor Richard B. Stewart (NYU Law School)

Chair: Professor Joanne Scott (UCL)
About this lecture:
Many different global regulatory bodies and their domestic counterparts increasingly follow global administrative law practices of transparency, participation, reason giving and review in making decisions. This lecture will address two fundamental questions regarding this striking new development. First, can Global Administrative Law improve global governance by, for example, fostering the rule of law, securing accountability, protecting disregarded interests, or promoting democratic values? Second, and related, to what extent are the elements of global administrative law “law,” as opposed to simply good administrative practice? The answers have profound implications for the legal profession and for law’s contribution to global governance.

Visit the event website.

Thursday 19 January 2012

IUS Commune

Courts, Climate Expertise and Civic Epistemologies

Speaker: Professor Sheila Jasanoff (Harvard Kennedy School)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

About this lecture:
The role of experts in the legal process has generally been examined from the standpoint of juridical capacity to distinguish reliable from unreliable knowledge. In an era of globalization it is more important to understand how courts evaluate the universal claims of science in relation to background cultural norms of reason, demonstration, and evidence—in short, to the collective knowledge ways that Professor Jasanoff has elsewhere termed "civic epistemologies." Using climate science as an example, she compares US and UK developments in climate law and policy to illustrate how courts reproduce the background norms of reasoning that give specificity to modern political cultures. Courts in this analysis are sites in which competing, quasi-constitutional understandings of the right relations between knowledge and power are tested and dominant ones are reaffirmed. Judicial decisions are at once markers of national difference and signposts to the epistemic habits that must be acknowledged and addressed in building common legal responses to global public problems.

Visit the event website.


Tuesday 6 December 2011

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Competition Law and Policy in the Healthcare Sector: A Trans-Atlantic Perspective

Speaker: Professor Fiona Scott Morton (Deputy Assistant Attorney General, US Dept. of Justice)

Commentators: Catherine Davies (Director, Co-Operation & Competition Panel) and Dr Pierre Regibeau (CRA / University of Essex)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

About this event:
Much healthcare provision is accomplished through networks of providers such as physicians, hospitals, pharmacies, and dentists. Common contract terms between the party organizing the network and the set of providers include non-discrimination terms like MFNs and network participation requirements. The talk will discuss theories of competitive effect and consumer harm resulting from such provisions, and cover empirical evidence of their impact in the healthcare sector.

Visit the website for this event.

Friday 2 December 2011

Centre for Law, Economics & Society, IBIL, and Loyola University Chicago

Brand, Competition Law and IP Law - Part I

Speakers include: Christian Alhborn (Linklaters), Edward Anderson (Sainsbury), Tony Appleton (Proctor & Gamble), Simon Baxter (Skadden Arps), Deven Desai (Google, Inc), Dr Peter Davis (Compass Lexecon), Dr Amelia Fletcher (OFT), Professor Johanna Gibson (QMUL), Professor Sir Robin Jacob (UCL Laws), Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL Laws), John Noble (British Brands Group) and Professor Spencer Weber Waller (Loyola University Chicago)

About this conference:
The aim of this conference is to reflect on the legal and economic understanding of brands by explaining what brands are and how they function, how trademark and competition law integrate brands in their framework and if this is satisfactory, and the role brands play in business competition. The conference will also delve into specific issues raised by branding in the 21st century business competition, such as the challenges raised by online business and the increasing role of private labels in distribution.

Visit the website for this event.

Wednesday 23 November 2011

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Arbitration and EU Competition Law: Do Not Tilt the Balance

Speaker: Dr Assimakis Komninos (White & Case, Brussels)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL
About this event:
Arbitration is a generally accepted method for the resolution of international business disputes and, for antitrust enforcement purposes, it represents another forum for the application of the competition rules. There is nowadays no doubt that EU competition law disputes can be submitted to arbitration (they are arbitrable), notwithstanding their public policy (ordre public) nature. After modernisation, exactly like courts, arbitrators have full competence to apply the whole of Article 101 TFEU, including its third paragraph. If the Commission were to issue in the future a notice or another informal instrument on arbitration, for clarity it could explicitly state the above proposition. The neglect of arbitration in Regulation 1/2003 and in the accompanying ‘Modernisation Package’ is not in itself problematic; however, the European Commission should always remain open to cooperate with arbitration tribunals either in an informal or a more formal way. In the future, the Commission could consider publishing a Notice or some Guidelines on cooperation with arbitral tribunals. Such a Notice could provide for a more structured dialogue between arbitrators and the Commission, while increasing the transparency of the whole system of cooperation. It would also raise the EU competition law awareness of arbitrators and parties, but should strive not to encroach on the fundamental principles of flexibility, confidentiality and privity of the arbitral process. Arbitration is not an organ of the Member States and therefore Articles 4(3) TEU and 16 Regulation 1/2003 are not directly binding on it. However, arbitral awards can be reviewed by EU-based State courts on public policy (ordre public) grounds, and this constitutes the ultimate and most efficient safeguard for the respectful application of the EU competition rules by arbitrators. To the extent an arbitral award may be reviewed and set aside on such grounds, the arbitrators should exercise caution when applying EU competition law and should even proceed to apply it of their own motion (ex officio). In the extreme case where an arbitral tribunal is an internal structure of a cartel and its function is to ensure compliance and resolve ‘disputes’ within the cartel, the arbitration clause itself would be illegal and the ‘arbitrators’ would be liable to fines under Article 101 TFEU.
Thursday 27 October 2011

IUS Commune

Non Discrimination in WTO: Revisiting the ALI Study

Speaker: Professor Petros Mavroidis (Columbia Law School)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos
About this lecture:
The project 'Principles of International Trade: the World Trade Organization' is an American Law Institute (ALI) study. Henrik Horn and Petros C. Mavroidis (Columbia Law School) are the Chief Reporters of the study, and Kyle W. Bagwell (Stanford, Economics), Gene M. Grossman (Princeton, Economics), Robert W. Staiger (Stanford, Economics) and Alan O. Sykes (Stanford Law School) are the reporters. Doug Irwin (Dartmouth, Economics) was an invited author. This event will briefly revisit the whole study, while focusing on the principle of non-discrimination with respect to domestic policies.

About the speaker:
Professor Mavroidis, who worked in the WTO's legal division in the 1990s, has written extensively on the organization and its predecessor, GATT. Judging from the increasing enrollment in Prof. Mavroidis's courses on the WTO, there is also a growing appreciation of its relevance in the world today. Prof. Mavroidis has remained active with the WTO. While teaching at the University of Neuchatel in Switzerland, he spent several days each month as a pro bono lawyer at the WTO, helping developing countries to settle disputes. Prof. Mavroidis is also involved with the American Law Institute as a chief co-reporter on the principles of WTO law, which will lead eventually to a series of legal recommendations. He says he hopes to see the WTO succeed not against the wheels of governments but as a consensus-driven organization.

From summer 2011 Prof. Mavroidis will be teaching at European University Institute, Florence, Italy.
Wednesday 13 July 2011

UCL Centre for Law, Economics & Society

Competition Law and Distributive Justice: A Critical State of Play

Speaker: Professor Herbert Hovenkamp (Ben and Dorothy Willie Chair, College of Law, University of Iowa)

Commentators: Professor Kai-Uwe Kühn (Chief economist, DG Competition, European Commission), Dr Amelia Fletcher (Chief Economist, OFT), Dr Jorge Padilla (Senior Managing Director and Head of Compass Lexecon Europe), Professor Richard O. Zerbe (Daniel J Evans Professor of Public Affairs, University of Washington) and Dr Ioannis Lianos (City Solicitors' Educational Trust Reader in European and Competition Law; Director, Centre for Law, Economics and Society, Faculty of Laws, UCL)

About the event:
The debate over the objectives of competition law statutes has recently intensified. There are many reasons for this: First, competition law has expanded globally to different forms of economies and societal bases, thus leading to different conceptions over its scope and aims. Second, the expansion of competition law has led to tensions between different legal regimes regulating the conduct of corporations in global markets. Thirdly, more and more State activities are now infused with a form of competition culture: competition law is applied to previously exempted economic activities and even to some State activities, competition advocacy has also developed. Equity considerations are explicitly integrated as objectives of several competition legislations around the world, and more specifically EU competition law in the area of state aids control, alongside efficiency (total welfare). Some could also envision the standard of consumer welfare as a distributive justice standard, in the sense that it focuses on wealth transfers from consumers to antitrust law infringers. This raises questions over the deep meaning of competition law and its interaction with other public policies, including policies aiming at wealth redistribution. Fourthly, economic analysis and evidence has become an essential ingredient of competition law discourse. Economic rhetoric emphasises efficiency considerations, but does not suppress the need for distributive choices. The recent work of the Stiglitz, Sen and Fitoussi Commission on the measurement of economic performance and social progress and the OECD happiness index illustrate this trend. Recent work has also highlighted the importance of equality concerns and distributive justice in public policy more generally (e.g. "The Spirit level"). More generally, there are fundamental questions raised by the application within the legal system of the principles of welfare economics, in view of the Stiglitz-Atkinson theorem and more generally the consideration of distributive justice by welfare economics. The concept of distributive justice also has considerably evolved over time. To be sure, its content is not the same as in the 1930s'. Finally, the recent emphasis of competition law worldwide on fostering consumer interest requires difficult choices from policy makers, competition authorities and the courts. They must set priorities over the long v. short term consumer interest (thus including intertemporal trade offs), trade off the interest of some classes of consumers versus others, adopt - explicitly or implicitly - a specific conception of the consumer (marginal versus infra-marginal, neoclassical versus behavioural...). The objective of this workshop will be to reflect on these fundamental issues in competition law and policy by inviting contributions from competition lawyers, economists, historians of economic thought, philosophers and sociologists.

Visit the website for this event.

Wednesday 18 May 2011

IUS Commune

Global Standards for National Democracies?
Speaker: Professor Sabino Cassesse (University of Rome)
Friday 6 May 2011

IUS Commune

Foundations of Private International Law in Intellectual Property
Speaker: Professor Jürgen Basedow (Director, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law, Hamburg)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos, UCL

Friday 18 March & Saturday 19 March 2011

Global Competition Law Series

Competition Law & the State: Comparative and International Perspectives

Speakers include: Gregory So (Under-Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Hong Kong SAR Government), John Fingleton (Chairman, UK Office of Fair Trading), William Kovacic (Commissioner, US Federal Trade Commission), Yena Lim Hua Yen (Chief Executive, Competition Commission of Singapore), Dhanendra Kumar (Chairman, Competition Commission of India), Eduardo Pérez Motta (President, Federal Competition Commission, Mexico), Zhu Zhong Liang (Anti-Monopoly Bureau, MOFCOM), Michiyo Hamada (Commissioner, Japanese Federal Trade Commission (JFTC)), Gert-Jan Koopman (Deputy Director General (State Aids), DG Comp, European Commission), Simon Milnes (Infrastructure, Competition and Consumer Division, the Australian Treasury), Frederic Jenny (Cour de Cassation and Chairman, OECD Competition Committee), Willard Tom (General Counsel, US Federal Trade Commission), Assimakis Komninos (Commissioner, Hellenic Competition Commission), Mark Whitener (Senior Counsel, Competition Law & Policy, General Electric) and many others including academics, in house and practitioner lawyers and economists.

About this conference:
The recent adoption of competition law statutes in East and South Asia, culminating with the enactment of the Indian Competition Act and the Chinese Antimonopoly Law, mark a significant development to the global business community. Merger control, the application of competition law to unilateral conduct such as distribution agreements, competition issues in intellectual property rights, and state activities in the economy create important challenges in the enforcement of competition law in these crucial markets for policymakers, multinational corporations, law firms and economic consultancies. A number of panels and roundtables will examine these issues, composed by the international and local leaders of the competition/regulatory law and M&A practice.

It will explore the important topic of government restrictions to competition, including
anti-competitive action by the State; state-owned enterprises and competition law; competition law and foreign state activities;
self-regulation and competition law; competitive neutrality regulation; competition advocacy;
the evolving role of government in markets and competition law; and
the interaction between competition law and regulatory alternatives in sectors such as utilities (energy, telecoms) broadcasting regulation, financial services, digital media, healthcare, the environment.

Friday 11 February 2011

IUS Commune

EU Citizenship: Post-national or Post-nationalist? On the Rottman Case (2010) and Its Implications

Speaker: Professor Mario Savino (Universita della Tuscia di Viterbo)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos, UCL

Download the full programme for this series.

Friday 19 November 2010

Global Competition Law Conference / UCL Centre for Law & Economics

Implementing Competition Law and Policy: Global Perspectives

Speakers: The speakers at this event included heads of competition authority, policy makers, academics and practitioners from around the world

About this conference:

The recent adoption of competition law statutes in East and South Asia, culminating with the enactment of the Indian Competition Act and the Chinese Antimonopoly Law, mark a significant development to the global business community. Merger control, the application of competition law to unilateral conduct such as distribution agreements, competition issues in intellectual property rights, and state activities in the economy create important challenges in the enforcement of competition law in these two crucial markets for policymakers, corporations, law firms and economic consultancies. A number of panels and roundtables will examine these issues, composed by the international and local leaders of the competition/regulatory law and M&A practice.

Monday 25 October 2010

UCL Centre for Law & Economics / Competition Law in a Global Context Lecture

Competition and Development: What Competition Law Regime?

Speaker: Prof. Abel Mateus (New University of Lisbon and former President, Portuguese Competition Authority)

About this lecture:

Using a law and economics model of competition law enforcement we try to answer the following questions: What characterises the effectiveness of a competition law regime? How has competition law enforcement spread around the world? What factors limit the enforcement of competition law? And finally, what regimes for competition law and what are the pre-requisites for each one? Our econometric analysis confirm that democracy, the level of education and control of vested interests are the most important pre-requisites for a competition law regime, and its improvement is crucial for having a more effective regime. Quality of public administration and the regulatory system as well as of the judicial system and reduction of corruption are sub-factors that are central to enforcement.

Tuesday 1 June 2010

UCL Centre for Law & Economics

US Antitrust Law under the Obama Administration: One year on

Speakers: Prof Eleanor Fox (New York University School of Law), Prof Andrew Gavil (Howard University School of Law),
Prof Maurice Stucke (University of Tennessee College of Law), Prof Spencer Weber Waller (Institute of Consumer Antitrust Studies, Loyola University Chicago School of Law)

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)


Friday 21 May & Saturday 22 May 2010

UCL Centre for Law & Economics Conference

Competition and Consumer Protection / Information Exchange Agreements

A conference in Nicosia (Cyprus) bringing together an international panel of speakers including Bernard Amory (Jones Day), Georgios Arestis (European Court of Justice), Matthew Bennett (UK Office of Fair Trading), Antonio Capobianco (OECD), Michal Gal (University of Haifa), Judge Frederic Jenny (OECD, Cour de Cassation), Professor John Kallaugher (Latham & Watkins and UCL), Assimakis Komninos (Hellenic Competition Commission), Professor Valentine Korah (UCL), Bill Kovacic (US Federal Trade Commission), Kai Uwe Kuhn (University of Michigan), Ioannis Lianos (UCL), Paolisa Nebbia (Italian Competition Authority), Petko Nikolov (Bulgarian Competition Authority), Alison Oldale (UK Competition Commission), Aleksandra Ossowska (European Commission, DG Comp), Jorge Padilla (LECG), Savvas Papasavvas (General Court of the EU), Robbert Snelders (Cleary Gottlieb), Jules Stuyck (University of Leuven), Avishalom Tor (University of Haifa) and Thibaut Vergé (French Competition Council)

Wednesday 17 March 2010

UCL Institute of Global Law / Centre for Law & Economics

Judicial Control of Standard Terms and European Private Law: A Law & Economics Perspective on the Draft Common Frame of Reference for a European Private Law

Speaker: Dr Patrick C. Leyens (University of Hamburg)

About this lecture:

With the Draft Common Frame of Reference of European Private Law updated in 2009, the European Union is striving for a uniform legal framework for judicial control of standard terms. The draft offers a chance to point out perspectives for European private law from the view of law and economics without being burdened by the constraints of current national laws or European directives. The basic issue to be dealt with is the question for the regulatory purpose of judicial clause control, which is not to be found in superior market power on the part of the user of standard terms. Rather, the informational asymmetries which cannot or can only partially be overcome by market mechanisms, are the justification for judicial intervention in the private allocation of risks via standard terms. On this basis, perspectives for the future development of the European and national understanding of the law of standard terms will be presented: we will suggest a form of clause control limited to the positive contract value-information cost-relationship together with a control cap for business contracts, an equal standard for controlling consumer and business contracts, and, a differentiating approach towards preserving a clause by adjusting the excessive risk allocation to a permissible maximum (salvatory reduction).

Thursday 21 January 2010

UCL Centre for Law & Economics (Public Policy Section)

Net Neutrality of the Internet

Speaker: Professor Nicholas Economides (NYU Stern Business School)


Thursday 3 December 2009

IUS Commune

Protection of the Weaker Party in European Contract Law - Standardised and Individual Inferiority in Multi-Level Private Law

Speaker: Dr Hannes Roesler (Senior Research Fellow, Max Planck Institute Hamburg)

Chair: Professor Hugh Collins (LSE)

About this lecture:

It is a permanent challenge to accomplish freedom of contract effectively and not just to provide its formal guarantee. Indeed, 19th century private law already included elements guaranteeing the protection of this "material" freedom of contract. However, consensus has been reached about the necessity for a private law system which also provides for real chances of self-determination. An example can be found in EC consumer law. Admittedly, the law is restrained - for reasons of legal certainty - by its personal and situational typicality and bound to formal prerequisites. However, the new rules against discrimination are dominated by approaches which strongly focus on the protection of the individual. It is supplemented by national provisions, which especially counterbalance individual weaknesses. The autonomy of national law can be explained by the different traditions with regard to "social" contract law in the Member States. The differences are especially apparent regarding public policy, good fair or breach of duty before or at the time of contracting (culpa in contrahendo). They form another argument against the undifferentiated saltation from partial to total harmonisation of contract law.

Tuesday 13 & Wednesday 14 October 2009

Vertical Restraints in EC Competition Law: New Dynamics

Conference with a a full programme of speakers including:
Philip Lowe (DG, European Commission), Philip Collins (Chairman, OFT), Sir Christopher Bellamy (Linklaters LLP), Judge Nicholas Forwood (European Court of First Instance) and others

About this conference:
The reform of EC competition law on vertical restraints has marked the beginning of the process of transformation of EC competition law in the late 1990s, in particular because of the adoption of a more compatible to neoclassical economic theory approach. Almost ten years since the adoption of Regulation 2790/99 and the vertical restraints guidelines, the European Commission has initiated a revision process and has published some proposals at this respect. The aim of this conference would be (a) to understand the process of the reform of EC competition law on verticals, (b) to provide some useful comparative insights, by looking to the most recent developments in US antitrust law on verticals as well as the most recent competition law practice in some Member States’ and selected jurisdictions and (c) to critically assess the proposals of the European Commission, by confronting them to recent economic theory and to legal practice.

The event explored:

  • General aspects of the reform of Vertical Restraints
  • A retrospective and prospective of the vertical restraints reform
  • Internet distribution and vertical restraints
  • Tying/bundling
  • Resale Price Maintenance
  • Exclusive territories and parallel trade
  • Vertical restraints and the rise of retailer power: competition law and alternatives
  • Vertical restraints in national competition laws and international convergence

Friday 29 May 2009

Centre for Law and Governance in Europe / Centre for Law & Economics

Competition Authorities' roundtable
The Reform of Competition Authorities and the 'Modernization' of Antitrust

Speakers include:
Philip Collins (Chairman, Office of Fair Trading, UK),
William Kovacic (Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission, US),
Bruno Lasserre (Chairman, Autorité de la concurrence, France),
Abel Mateus (Professor, University of Lisbon, former president of the Portuguese competition authority)
Carles Esteva Mosso (Director of Policy and Strategy, DG Competition, European Commission)

Chair: Frederic Jenny (Judge, Cour de Cassation, France; member of the Board, Office of Fair Trading; President, Competition Committee, OECD; Visiting Professor, UCL)

About this event:

The roundtable will examine the following topics:

  • Competition authorities with dual roles (competition authority and consumer protection authority): advantages and disadvantages
  • The unification of public competition law enforcement: is one better than two? (the reform of the French competition law system)
  • Integrating economics and economists in competition authorities: the recent reform of the DG Comp with the position of the chief economist, the redesign of the units….
  • Issues of independence, transparency, competition advocacy
  • Relations with sector-specific regulators
  • Political influence: Competition authorities in times of economic crisis.

View the programme.

Thursday 7 May 2009

Competition Law in a Global Context

Economic Expertise in a Generalist Court: The Experience of a Economist / Judge in a Civil Law Jurisdiction

Speaker: Judge Frederic Jenny (UCL & Supreme Court of France (Cour de Cassation))

Chair: Dr Ioannis Lianos (UCL)

About this lecture:

Drawing on his experience as the first economist generalist judge at the French Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation), Judge Frederic Jenny will explore the following topics: if and how economic reasoning has been integrated in the Cour de cassation's judgments, since he has been appointed ? Did economic analysis make a difference in any cases? Would it help in the case of generalist judges to have court-appointed experts, or assessors or judges that have an economics background ? What would be the best method to integrate economic reasoning, taking into account the way the Cour de cassation and other generalist judges work and decide cases?

Thursday 5 March 2009

Competition Law in a Global Context

Economic expertise in courts: best practices

Speaker: Judge Frederic Jenny (UCL & Supreme Court of France (Cour de Cassation))

About this lecture:

The OECD has published a best practices report on the topic of presenting complex economic theories to judges. Judge Frederic Jenny will discuss the recommendations of the report as well as present different options in addressing the difficulty of the assessment of complex economic evidence in litigation.

Monday 2 - 31 March 2009

CPD Course

Competition, IP and Contractual Issues in the Media Industry: Law and Practice

Speaker: Andrea Appella (OFT Director of International and Senior Research Fellow, UCL)

About this course:

The media industry is fast-moving and undergoing a process of development during the digital age. The objective of this course is to introduce the key features of the media industry and the significant issues arising from the application of competition and IP laws, as well as explaining the typical contractual structures in the industry.


Page last modified on 21 may 15 12:29