Competition Law International (CLI)

Read this article online     Download the PDF

In a global environment shaped by supply chain shifts, digital markets, renewed industrial policies and growing public demand for results, competition authorities face increasing pressure to be more effective, predictable and internationally coordinated while remaining responsive to local realities. Common priorities across jurisdictions include strengthening investigative tools, reducing enforcement timelines, focusing on cases with direct consumer impact and deepening international cooperation. In this interview, conducted six months after the implementation of Mexico’s new competition regime reform, Andrea Marván reflects on the country’s new institutional phase and the transformation underway within the authority. She discusses the internal adjustments prompted by the reform, the challenge of balancing strong enforcement with legal certainty, and Mexico’s evolving role within Latin America and multilateral forums such as the International Competition Network. The conversation provides a detailed perspective on how a stronger, more results-oriented and internationally engaged competition authority is taking shape in Mexico.

Read this article online     Download the PDF

This article examines the evolving coordination between Brazil’s competition and anti-corruption authorities in the enforcement of bid-rigging cartels. It analyses the interaction between CADE’s antitrust leniency framework and the CGU/AGU anti-corruption regime, with particular focus on Interministerial Normative Ordinance No 1/2025. The article discusses procedural synchronisation, confidentiality, compliance programmes and the reduction of fines in multi-agency leniency negotiations. It also explores unresolved challenges involving settlement agreements, cumulative sanctions and proportionality. The article argues that increased institutional cooperation may transform Brazil’s dual enforcement model into a more predictable and coherent system for cartel enforcement and corporate cooperation.

Read this article online     Download the PDF

Ireland has undergone a significant shift in how it enforces its competition laws. Historically, Ireland was almost unique in Europe for relying on criminal prosecution to punish cartel conduct. This stood in contrast to the administrative enforcement model used by the EU and most EU Member States, where competition authorities themselves impose fines on companies. The enactment of the Competition (Amendment) Act 2022, transposing the ECN+ Directive (EU) 2019/1, fundamentally transformed this landscape by empowering the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) to impose administrative financial sanctions of up to €10m or ten per cent of worldwide turnover on undertakings, applying the civil standard of proof. This article examines Ireland’s new administrative enforcement regime in its historical context, discussing the limitations of the former regime, the key features of the 2022 reform – including the roles of Adjudication Officers, the requirement for High Court confirmation of decisions and the operation of dual leniency programmes – and the practical implications for competition law enforcement in Ireland.

Read this article online     Download the PDF

This article analyses the first Italian proceeding on no-poach agreements, initiated on 22 December 2025 by the Italian Competition Authority (AGCM or the ‘Authority’), Case I881, concerning an alleged agreement for the reciprocal non-hiring of employees between companies operating in the Emilia-Romagna packaging valley. The Authority hypothesises that this agreement constitutes a restriction of competition in the labour supply market, expressly recognising the competitive importance of the labour market. The article places the case in the broader context of the evolution of European enforcement, examining it in light of the recent decision of the European Commission in Case AT.40795 – Food Delivery Services, which qualified mutual non-solicitation agreements as restrictions by object.

Read this article online     Download the PDF

This article examines the European Commission’s landmark decision in Case AT.40437 (Apple – App Store Practices), in which Apple was fined over €1.8bn for abusing its dominant position through the imposition of anti-steering provisions on music streaming app developers. The decision represents a significant development in the application of Article 102(a) TFEU as an exploitative abuse, finding that Apple’s conduct constituted unfair trading conditions detrimental to consumer interests. This article analyses the Commission’s approach to market definition, dominance assessment and the legal test for exploitative abuse in the context of digital platform markets. Through a comparative lens, it further examines how the concept of ‘fairness’ is operationalised in EU competition law and Japan’s newly enacted Smartphone Software Competition Promotion Act.

Read this article online     Download the PDF

This article explores the evolution of antitrust enforcement in North Macedonia, tracing its journey from a state-dominated economy to a market-oriented system driven by EU integration ambitions. It provides a comprehensive overview of the historical arc of enforcement activity, moving from proactive early interventions against monopolies, through a decade of relative inactivity, to a reinvigorated practice that has defined 2025 as a ‘record year’ for the Competition Commission. The authors examine how the authority has matured into a more refined enforcement body, now armed with what can be described as a ‘Swiss army knife’ of investigative powers. This includes the more aggressive use of dawn raids and the active promotion of leniency programs to uncover high-profile cartels in crucial sectors like insurance and retail. The article also addresses the authority’s expanded mandate under the 2024 Law on Prohibiting Unfair Trade Practices, a critical tool designed to protect the agricultural and food supply chain from exploitative conduct. Ultimately, these developments offer a clear picture of an authority that is now better placed than ever to ensure fair market play and safeguard consumer welfare in an increasingly maturing economy.

Read this article online     Download the PDF

Antitrust authorities worldwide are increasingly scrutinising anti-competitive labour practices. The Turkish Competition Authority issued Guidelines on Competition Infringement in Labour Markets on 3 December 2024, detailing its enforcement policies on issues such as no-poaching and wage-fixing agreements, information exchanges and ancillary restraints. While the Guidelines are among the most comprehensive globally, they fall short in explaining the underlying economic mechanisms and offering practical guidance on critical areas. They lack detailed exploration of collective bargaining agreements, the interplay between no-poaching assessments and broader ancillary restraints and include ambiguities in practical implementation of ancillary restraint and information exchange criteria. This article examines the Guidelines alongside relevant reasoned decisions of the Turkish Competition Board, contrasting them with selected international approaches.

Read this article online     Download the PDF

• Volume 21 Number 2, December 2025
• Volume 21 Number 1, June 2025
• Volume 20 Number 2, December 2024
• Volume 20 Number 1, July 2024
• Volume 19 Number 2, November 2023
• Volume 19 Number 1, June 2023
• Volume 18 Number 2, November 2022
• Volume 18 Number 1, June 2022
• Volume 17 Number 2, December 2021
• Volume 17 Number 1, June 2021
• Volume 16 Number 2, December 2020
• Volume 16 Number 1, October 2020
• Volume 15 Number 2, December 2019
• Volume 15 Number 1, May 2019