<?xml version="1.0"?>
<oembed><version>1.0</version><provider_name>Euclid Law</provider_name><provider_url>https://euclid-law.eu</provider_url><author_name>jj.workstuff</author_name><author_url>https://euclid-law.eu/author/jj-workstuff/</author_url><title>REVISION: The EU Competition Law Fining System: A Quantitative Review of the Commission Decisions between 2000 and 2017 - Euclid Law</title><type>rich</type><width>600</width><height>338</height><html>&lt;blockquote class="wp-embedded-content"&gt;&lt;a href="https://euclid-law.eu/revision-the-eu-competition-law-fining-system-a-quantitative-review-of-the-commission-decisions-between-2000-and-2017/"&gt;REVISION: The EU Competition Law Fining System: A Quantitative Review of the Commission Decisions between 2000 and 2017&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
&lt;script type='text/javascript'&gt;
&lt;!--//--&gt;&lt;![CDATA[//&gt;&lt;!--
		/*! This file is auto-generated */
		!function(d,l){"use strict";var e=!1,o=!1;if(l.querySelector)if(d.addEventListener)e=!0;if(d.wp=d.wp||{},!d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage)if(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if(t)if(t.secret||t.message||t.value)if(!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){var r,a,i,s,n,o=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]');for(r=0;r&lt;c.length;r++)c[r].style.display="none";for(r=0;r&lt;o.length;r++)if(a=o[r],e.source===a.contentWindow){if(a.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message){if(1e3&lt;(i=parseInt(t.value,10)))i=1e3;else if(~~i&lt;200)i=200;a.height=i}if("link"===t.message)if(s=l.createElement("a"),n=l.createElement("a"),s.href=a.getAttribute("src"),n.href=t.value,n.host===s.host)if(l.activeElement===a)d.top.location.href=t.value}}},e)d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",t,!1),d.addEventListener("load",t,!1);function t(){if(!o){o=!0;var e,t,r,a,i=-1!==navigator.appVersion.indexOf("MSIE 10"),s=!!navigator.userAgent.match(/Trident.*rv:11\./),n=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content");for(t=0;t&lt;n.length;t++){if(!(r=n[t]).getAttribute("data-secret"))a=Math.random().toString(36).substr(2,10),r.src+="#?secret="+a,r.setAttribute("data-secret",a);if(i||s)(e=r.cloneNode(!0)).removeAttribute("security"),r.parentNode.replaceChild(e,r)}}}}(window,document);
//--&gt;&lt;!]]&gt;
&lt;/script&gt;&lt;iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="https://euclid-law.eu/revision-the-eu-competition-law-fining-system-a-quantitative-review-of-the-commission-decisions-between-2000-and-2017/embed/" width="600" height="338" title="&#x201C;REVISION: The EU Competition Law Fining System: A Quantitative Review of the Commission Decisions between 2000 and 2017&#x201D; &#x2014; Euclid Law" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;</html><description>There is a large amount of legal and economic literature on the fining policy of the European Commission for breaches of EU competition law. This paper takes a quantitative approach as it analyses the factors that have been considered by the Commission in establishing the level of the fine imposed on infringing undertakings in 110 cartel decisions, as well 11 abuse of dominance decisions, adopted between January 2000 and March 2017. The factors included in our analysis, which is summarized in two tables provided in an Annex, comprise inter alia the gravity of the infringement, the presence of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the adoption of an entry fee, whether inability to pay was invoked, and in the case of cartels the presence of some form of leniency and/or the use of the settlement procedure. We also looked at whether these Commission decisions have been appealed to the General Court of the EU. Our analysis shows that the Commission has made significant use of the ...</description></oembed>
