When two worlds collide: The interface between competition law and data protection

Christopher Kuner, Fred H Cate, Christopher Millard, Dan Jerker B Svantesson, Orla Lynskey

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorialResearch

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In his seminal article ‘The Limits of Antitrust’, Easterbrook argued that ‘when everything is relevant, nothing is dispositive’; therefore, when applying competition law, judges should resort to clear presumptions rather than balancing the pro- and anti-competitive effects of particular conduct.1 In the intervening 20 years, much ink has been spilled on the issue of whether competition law should take into consideration wider policy objectives.2 This discussion has been given renewed impetus in recent months following the publication of a ‘preliminary opinion on the intersection of data protection, consumer protection and competition law’ in March of this year by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS).3 The publication of this report was followed by a workshop held under Chatham House rules in Brussels in June, a summary of which was published by the EDPS in July.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)247-248
Number of pages2
JournalInternational Data Privacy Law
Volume4
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2014

Fingerprint

data protection
Law
consumer protection

Cite this

Kuner, Christopher ; Cate, Fred H ; Millard, Christopher ; Svantesson, Dan Jerker B ; Lynskey, Orla. / When two worlds collide : The interface between competition law and data protection . In: International Data Privacy Law. 2014 ; Vol. 4, No. 4. pp. 247-248.
@article{6c6a7fbdc16c4ee6b7eea9470a954a85,
title = "When two worlds collide: The interface between competition law and data protection",
abstract = "In his seminal article ‘The Limits of Antitrust’, Easterbrook argued that ‘when everything is relevant, nothing is dispositive’; therefore, when applying competition law, judges should resort to clear presumptions rather than balancing the pro- and anti-competitive effects of particular conduct.1 In the intervening 20 years, much ink has been spilled on the issue of whether competition law should take into consideration wider policy objectives.2 This discussion has been given renewed impetus in recent months following the publication of a ‘preliminary opinion on the intersection of data protection, consumer protection and competition law’ in March of this year by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS).3 The publication of this report was followed by a workshop held under Chatham House rules in Brussels in June, a summary of which was published by the EDPS in July.",
author = "Christopher Kuner and Cate, {Fred H} and Christopher Millard and Svantesson, {Dan Jerker B} and Orla Lynskey",
year = "2014",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/idpl/ipu025",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "247--248",
journal = "International Data Privacy Law",
issn = "2044-3994",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "4",

}

When two worlds collide : The interface between competition law and data protection . / Kuner, Christopher; Cate, Fred H; Millard, Christopher; Svantesson, Dan Jerker B; Lynskey, Orla.

In: International Data Privacy Law, Vol. 4, No. 4, 01.11.2014, p. 247-248.

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorialResearch

TY - JOUR

T1 - When two worlds collide

T2 - The interface between competition law and data protection

AU - Kuner, Christopher

AU - Cate, Fred H

AU - Millard, Christopher

AU - Svantesson, Dan Jerker B

AU - Lynskey, Orla

PY - 2014/11/1

Y1 - 2014/11/1

N2 - In his seminal article ‘The Limits of Antitrust’, Easterbrook argued that ‘when everything is relevant, nothing is dispositive’; therefore, when applying competition law, judges should resort to clear presumptions rather than balancing the pro- and anti-competitive effects of particular conduct.1 In the intervening 20 years, much ink has been spilled on the issue of whether competition law should take into consideration wider policy objectives.2 This discussion has been given renewed impetus in recent months following the publication of a ‘preliminary opinion on the intersection of data protection, consumer protection and competition law’ in March of this year by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS).3 The publication of this report was followed by a workshop held under Chatham House rules in Brussels in June, a summary of which was published by the EDPS in July.

AB - In his seminal article ‘The Limits of Antitrust’, Easterbrook argued that ‘when everything is relevant, nothing is dispositive’; therefore, when applying competition law, judges should resort to clear presumptions rather than balancing the pro- and anti-competitive effects of particular conduct.1 In the intervening 20 years, much ink has been spilled on the issue of whether competition law should take into consideration wider policy objectives.2 This discussion has been given renewed impetus in recent months following the publication of a ‘preliminary opinion on the intersection of data protection, consumer protection and competition law’ in March of this year by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS).3 The publication of this report was followed by a workshop held under Chatham House rules in Brussels in June, a summary of which was published by the EDPS in July.

U2 - 10.1093/idpl/ipu025

DO - 10.1093/idpl/ipu025

M3 - Editorial

VL - 4

SP - 247

EP - 248

JO - International Data Privacy Law

JF - International Data Privacy Law

SN - 2044-3994

IS - 4

ER -