Post by account_disabled on Mar 16, 2024 4:29:19 GMT -6
Antitrust law emerged in the last two decades of the 19th century ( Act for the Prevention and Suppression of Combinations Formed in Restraint of Trade – Canada, 1889 and Sherman Act – United States of America, 1990), to address acts aimed at the elimination of competitors, which would be classified and penalized as violations of antitrust law; and subsequently the concern arose to control mergers and acquisitions of companies. The most common issues, both in doctrine and in the media, regarding competition law are cartels, the best-known and most insidious type of antitrust law violations; and economic concentrations. Cartels[ 1 ] and concentrations compete for the time of bodies that apply competition law in States and regional integration economic blocs[ 2 ]. Several reforms were made to try to limit the notification of mergers to those who are necessary, so as not to clutter up these bodies to the detriment of the prosecution of illicit anti-competitive acts.
Attesting to the recurrence of major concentrations in Brazil, the merger between two large educational entities is currently on the agenda at Cade. Hence the value of academic studies that contribute to the advancement of the topic. My attention was drawn to my master's dissertation, defended a few days ago at the USP Law School, entitled: Comparative Legal Study on Business Concentration Control: Brazil, France and Mexico , authored by Eric R. Cezaretti [ 3 ] . This is a comparative study of concentration control in Brazil, France and Mexico; as well as, in addition, in the international intergovernmental economic integration organizations in which these countries participate, respectively, Mercosur, the European Union and NAFTA.
In the author's words, the “comparative method seeks, systematically, through comparison, to determine correlations between facts, individuals, classes or B2B Lead phenomena, which will enable the indication of similarities and differences, with the aim of reaching an objective. Such a method, in the legal field, will make it possible to compare, either two or more legal systems, considered in their entirety — macro comparison — or between similar institutes of two or more different legal systems — micro comparison —, with a final objective, that is, to collaborate to strengthening legal culture”[ 4 ].
In this synchronic micro-comparative study of three legal systems belonging to the Roman family branch, the law, doctrine and jurisprudence of the chosen States were studied, as well as the influences of the aforementioned blocs on their member countries. After an individual study of each of the three countries, comparisons were made with reference to: antecedents of competition concerns; competition legislation; evolution of competition and concentration laws; prior notification of mergers; evolution of antitrust bodies; current competition bodies; concentration control procedure; current competition laws and their regulations, guides, etc.; doctrine and jurisprudence. Likewise, after studying each of the three economic blocs, comparisons were made regarding: objectives of the economic blocs, antitrust concerns in the blocs, influence of the blocs in member countries and prior notification of concentration acts.