Suchergebnisse

This master thesis analyses the private enforcement of competition law in private international law. It should be noted that competition law can be implemented under two methods: (a) public enforcement (regulatory norms that preserves the proper competition policy); (b) private enforcement (by allowing to seek redress for those who are victims of acts of anti-competitive or restrictive practices). As the international economy develops, with the increasing competitiveness of its entities, there is an expanding need to address the issue of applicable law. However, if such a dispute arises in two EU countries, then the applicable law and procedural redress transactions are governed by the Rome II Regulation and Directive of antitrust damages actions (since 2017). Furthermore, this directive harmonizes the regulation in the EU member states' domestic legal systems. Moreover, at EU level, the enforcement of private competition law is being resolved. Nevertheless, practically this institute is not applicable. The key to this problem is the lack of successful precedents. However, given the fact that UK declared to be leaving EU, this may affect not only the domestic law of UK, but additionally the application of the above-mentioned EU legislation. Although the effects of Brexit are not yet foreseen, predictions can already be made now. It goes without saying that the EU has commercial ties not only with the Member States but also with the third countries. Thus, in cases of vulnerability, such as the markets of Japan and the EU Member States, the issue of applicable law arises. Notwithstanding, the EU has concluded international agreements with the third countries and these agreements are considered to have an impact on public but not private competition law. Hence, the paper scrutinizes conceivable rules under the private international law.

This master thesis analyses the private enforcement of competition law in private international law. It should be noted that competition law can be implemented under two methods: (a) public enforcement (regulatory norms that preserves the proper competition policy); (b) private enforcement (by allowing to seek redress for those who are victims of acts of anti-competitive or restrictive practices). As the international economy develops, with the increasing competitiveness of its entities, there is an expanding need to address the issue of applicable law. However, if such a dispute arises in two EU countries, then the applicable law and procedural redress transactions are governed by the Rome II Regulation and Directive of antitrust damages actions (since 2017). Furthermore, this directive harmonizes the regulation in the EU member states' domestic legal systems. Moreover, at EU level, the enforcement of private competition law is being resolved. Nevertheless, practically this institute is not applicable. The key to this problem is the lack of successful precedents. However, given the fact that UK declared to be leaving EU, this may affect not only the domestic law of UK, but additionally the application of the above-mentioned EU legislation. Although the effects of Brexit are not yet foreseen, predictions can already be made now. It goes without saying that the EU has commercial ties not only with the Member States but also with the third countries. Thus, in cases of vulnerability, such as the markets of Japan and the EU Member States, the issue of applicable law arises. Notwithstanding, the EU has concluded international agreements with the third countries and these agreements are considered to have an impact on public but not private competition law. Hence, the paper scrutinizes conceivable rules under the private international law.

This master thesis analyses the private enforcement of competition law in private international law. It should be noted that competition law can be implemented under two methods: (a) public enforcement (regulatory norms that preserves the proper competition policy); (b) private enforcement (by allowing to seek redress for those who are victims of acts of anti-competitive or restrictive practices). As the international economy develops, with the increasing competitiveness of its entities, there is an expanding need to address the issue of applicable law. However, if such a dispute arises in two EU countries, then the applicable law and procedural redress transactions are governed by the Rome II Regulation and Directive of antitrust damages actions (since 2017). Furthermore, this directive harmonizes the regulation in the EU member states' domestic legal systems. Moreover, at EU level, the enforcement of private competition law is being resolved. Nevertheless, practically this institute is not applicable. The key to this problem is the lack of successful precedents. However, given the fact that UK declared to be leaving EU, this may affect not only the domestic law of UK, but additionally the application of the above-mentioned EU legislation. Although the effects of Brexit are not yet foreseen, predictions can already be made now. It goes without saying that the EU has commercial ties not only with the Member States but also with the third countries. Thus, in cases of vulnerability, such as the markets of Japan and the EU Member States, the issue of applicable law arises. Notwithstanding, the EU has concluded international agreements with the third countries and these agreements are considered to have an impact on public but not private competition law. Hence, the paper scrutinizes conceivable rules under the private international law.

This master thesis analyses the private enforcement of competition law in private international law. It should be noted that competition law can be implemented under two methods: (a) public enforcement (regulatory norms that preserves the proper competition policy); (b) private enforcement (by allowing to seek redress for those who are victims of acts of anti-competitive or restrictive practices). As the international economy develops, with the increasing competitiveness of its entities, there is an expanding need to address the issue of applicable law. However, if such a dispute arises in two EU countries, then the applicable law and procedural redress transactions are governed by the Rome II Regulation and Directive of antitrust damages actions (since 2017). Furthermore, this directive harmonizes the regulation in the EU member states' domestic legal systems. Moreover, at EU level, the enforcement of private competition law is being resolved. Nevertheless, practically this institute is not applicable. The key to this problem is the lack of successful precedents. However, given the fact that UK declared to be leaving EU, this may affect not only the domestic law of UK, but additionally the application of the above-mentioned EU legislation. Although the effects of Brexit are not yet foreseen, predictions can already be made now. It goes without saying that the EU has commercial ties not only with the Member States but also with the third countries. Thus, in cases of vulnerability, such as the markets of Japan and the EU Member States, the issue of applicable law arises. Notwithstanding, the EU has concluded international agreements with the third countries and these agreements are considered to have an impact on public but not private competition law. Hence, the paper scrutinizes conceivable rules under the private international law.

The article deals with the interconnected issues of tax "burden" and international tax competition. Author bases his argumentation vis'a vis these issues on holistic assumptions, namely on the postulates that the public sector is part of the economy and that taxes are not simply a burden laid down on the private sector, but the source of investment in the production (procurement) of public goods. Furthermore, author stresses that for more than a century one can follow the tendency of the increasing share of tax revenues in the national product, the so-called as Wagner's law. In recent decades, another - international-factor of fiscal policy is playing an increasingly importan role. This is tax competition among national states. This factor poses threat to tax bases of sovereign countries and leads, as some assume, to the appearance of tax havens, tax poaching, race-to-the botton, social dumping and other negative phenomenan which distort the natural course of economic development. This trend is supported by power centers which pursue the individualistic economic strategy and base their perception of economy on the premises of methodological individualism. Some other power centers, institutions, on the other hand, resist this tendency as harmful to the global welfare. The United Nations, OECD and partly EU assert that international harmonization in the field of taxation could be conductive to economic growth and prosperity of mankind.

The article deals with the interconnected issues of tax "burden" and international tax competition. Author bases his argumentation vis'a vis these issues on holistic assumptions, namely on the postulates that the public sector is part of the economy and that taxes are not simply a burden laid down on the private sector, but the source of investment in the production (procurement) of public goods. Furthermore, author stresses that for more than a century one can follow the tendency of the increasing share of tax revenues in the national product, the so-called as Wagner's law. In recent decades, another - international-factor of fiscal policy is playing an increasingly importan role. This is tax competition among national states. This factor poses threat to tax bases of sovereign countries and leads, as some assume, to the appearance of tax havens, tax poaching, race-to-the botton, social dumping and other negative phenomenan which distort the natural course of economic development. This trend is supported by power centers which pursue the individualistic economic strategy and base their perception of economy on the premises of methodological individualism. Some other power centers, institutions, on the other hand, resist this tendency as harmful to the global welfare. The United Nations, OECD and partly EU assert that international harmonization in the field of taxation could be conductive to economic growth and prosperity of mankind.

The article deals with the interconnected issues of tax "burden" and international tax competition. Author bases his argumentation vis'a vis these issues on holistic assumptions, namely on the postulates that the public sector is part of the economy and that taxes are not simply a burden laid down on the private sector, but the source of investment in the production (procurement) of public goods. Furthermore, author stresses that for more than a century one can follow the tendency of the increasing share of tax revenues in the national product, the so-called as Wagner's law. In recent decades, another - international-factor of fiscal policy is playing an increasingly importan role. This is tax competition among national states. This factor poses threat to tax bases of sovereign countries and leads, as some assume, to the appearance of tax havens, tax poaching, race-to-the botton, social dumping and other negative phenomenan which distort the natural course of economic development. This trend is supported by power centers which pursue the individualistic economic strategy and base their perception of economy on the premises of methodological individualism. Some other power centers, institutions, on the other hand, resist this tendency as harmful to the global welfare. The United Nations, OECD and partly EU assert that international harmonization in the field of taxation could be conductive to economic growth and prosperity of mankind.

The article deals with the interconnected issues of tax "burden" and international tax competition. Author bases his argumentation vis'a vis these issues on holistic assumptions, namely on the postulates that the public sector is part of the economy and that taxes are not simply a burden laid down on the private sector, but the source of investment in the production (procurement) of public goods. Furthermore, author stresses that for more than a century one can follow the tendency of the increasing share of tax revenues in the national product, the so-called as Wagner's law. In recent decades, another - international-factor of fiscal policy is playing an increasingly importan role. This is tax competition among national states. This factor poses threat to tax bases of sovereign countries and leads, as some assume, to the appearance of tax havens, tax poaching, race-to-the botton, social dumping and other negative phenomenan which distort the natural course of economic development. This trend is supported by power centers which pursue the individualistic economic strategy and base their perception of economy on the premises of methodological individualism. Some other power centers, institutions, on the other hand, resist this tendency as harmful to the global welfare. The United Nations, OECD and partly EU assert that international harmonization in the field of taxation could be conductive to economic growth and prosperity of mankind.

This article, as first of set of publications, analyses international tax competition, its common aspects and measures that countries take to counteract its harmful effects on national income from taxes, trying to prove, that, despite apparent political inspirations, tax competition is also relevant legally. It is proposed, that real tax competition is not complex tax policy decisions (to reduce rates, introduce flat rate or progressive ones etc.) in order to encourage different economic or social processes, but those, aimed at non-resident taxpayers, when taxes become the main or even only reason for their certain business or investment decisions. International tax competition is discussed using two basic categories offered by the OECD and widely accepted by international community - "preferential tax regimes" and "tax havens", also acknowledging, that phenomenon besides pure tax regulation also includes different regulations for financial services and business as a whole, limits of authority of state institutions etc. It is concluded, that clear identification of mentioned above is relevant not only politically, but legally as well, because that not only shows states' "competitive orientation" but also directly influences effectiveness and functionality of measures used to counter its harmful effects.

This article, as first of set of publications, analyses international tax competition, its common aspects and measures that countries take to counteract its harmful effects on national income from taxes, trying to prove, that, despite apparent political inspirations, tax competition is also relevant legally. It is proposed, that real tax competition is not complex tax policy decisions (to reduce rates, introduce flat rate or progressive ones etc.) in order to encourage different economic or social processes, but those, aimed at non-resident taxpayers, when taxes become the main or even only reason for their certain business or investment decisions. International tax competition is discussed using two basic categories offered by the OECD and widely accepted by international community - "preferential tax regimes" and "tax havens", also acknowledging, that phenomenon besides pure tax regulation also includes different regulations for financial services and business as a whole, limits of authority of state institutions etc. It is concluded, that clear identification of mentioned above is relevant not only politically, but legally as well, because that not only shows states' "competitive orientation" but also directly influences effectiveness and functionality of measures used to counter its harmful effects.

This article, as first of set of publications, analyses international tax competition, its common aspects and measures that countries take to counteract its harmful effects on national income from taxes, trying to prove, that, despite apparent political inspirations, tax competition is also relevant legally. It is proposed, that real tax competition is not complex tax policy decisions (to reduce rates, introduce flat rate or progressive ones etc.) in order to encourage different economic or social processes, but those, aimed at non-resident taxpayers, when taxes become the main or even only reason for their certain business or investment decisions. International tax competition is discussed using two basic categories offered by the OECD and widely accepted by international community - "preferential tax regimes" and "tax havens", also acknowledging, that phenomenon besides pure tax regulation also includes different regulations for financial services and business as a whole, limits of authority of state institutions etc. It is concluded, that clear identification of mentioned above is relevant not only politically, but legally as well, because that not only shows states' "competitive orientation" but also directly influences effectiveness and functionality of measures used to counter its harmful effects.

This article, as first of set of publications, analyses international tax competition, its common aspects and measures that countries take to counteract its harmful effects on national income from taxes, trying to prove, that, despite apparent political inspirations, tax competition is also relevant legally. It is proposed, that real tax competition is not complex tax policy decisions (to reduce rates, introduce flat rate or progressive ones etc.) in order to encourage different economic or social processes, but those, aimed at non-resident taxpayers, when taxes become the main or even only reason for their certain business or investment decisions. International tax competition is discussed using two basic categories offered by the OECD and widely accepted by international community - "preferential tax regimes" and "tax havens", also acknowledging, that phenomenon besides pure tax regulation also includes different regulations for financial services and business as a whole, limits of authority of state institutions etc. It is concluded, that clear identification of mentioned above is relevant not only politically, but legally as well, because that not only shows states' "competitive orientation" but also directly influences effectiveness and functionality of measures used to counter its harmful effects.

Comparative Analysis of the Systems for the Protection of Competition in the United States and the European Union SUMMARY The US and the EU perform similar roles in protecting the global competition. The EU, which pursues the goal to have the competetive common market and to successfully compete in the global market, considers the antitrust policy in the US, therefore the current convergency of the competition rules would probably increase. Nevertheless, there is still some substantial divergency in the systems for the protection of competition in the US and the EU. The primary objective of the master thesis is to reveal and to investigate the actual differences in the systems for the protection of competition in the US and the EC in legal theory and practise. The subsidiary objective is to present the authoritative views, positive arguments and criticism for the divergent regulation in both systems. In order to accomplish these objectives, the provisions of legal acts, doctrine, manifold case examples of the courts and competition authorities have been analysed in the regulation of prohibited agreements, single firm conduct and merger control. The master thesis presents the overview of the evolution of antitrust, the main objectives and differences in the public and private enforcement, sanctions and the leniency policy. The divergent approach is revealed by comparing the rule of reason approach in the US and the analysis of Article 81 of the EC Treaty, as well as different assessment of vertical restraints. The brief comparison of the understanding of the abuse of a dominant position and the monopolization is provided. The EC competition law and the US antitrust policy are contrasted with each other, when assessing the conduct of a single undertaking in setting high and predatory prices, monopoly leveraging, tying, bundling and essential facilities doctrine. The remaining divergence in merger control is disclosed by the analysis of the tests applied and the assessment of vertical and conglomerate mergers. The national competition law of Lithuania is in the process of harmonization with the EC law of competition. However, the next stage in establishing the effective national system for the protection of competition could possibly be the deep look at the practise in other states, especially at the US policy of antitrust.

Comparative Analysis of the Systems for the Protection of Competition in the United States and the European Union SUMMARY The US and the EU perform similar roles in protecting the global competition. The EU, which pursues the goal to have the competetive common market and to successfully compete in the global market, considers the antitrust policy in the US, therefore the current convergency of the competition rules would probably increase. Nevertheless, there is still some substantial divergency in the systems for the protection of competition in the US and the EU. The primary objective of the master thesis is to reveal and to investigate the actual differences in the systems for the protection of competition in the US and the EC in legal theory and practise. The subsidiary objective is to present the authoritative views, positive arguments and criticism for the divergent regulation in both systems. In order to accomplish these objectives, the provisions of legal acts, doctrine, manifold case examples of the courts and competition authorities have been analysed in the regulation of prohibited agreements, single firm conduct and merger control. The master thesis presents the overview of the evolution of antitrust, the main objectives and differences in the public and private enforcement, sanctions and the leniency policy. The divergent approach is revealed by comparing the rule of reason approach in the US and the analysis of Article 81 of the EC Treaty, as well as different assessment of vertical restraints. The brief comparison of the understanding of the abuse of a dominant position and the monopolization is provided. The EC competition law and the US antitrust policy are contrasted with each other, when assessing the conduct of a single undertaking in setting high and predatory prices, monopoly leveraging, tying, bundling and essential facilities doctrine. The remaining divergence in merger control is disclosed by the analysis of the tests applied and the assessment of vertical and conglomerate mergers. The national competition law of Lithuania is in the process of harmonization with the EC law of competition. However, the next stage in establishing the effective national system for the protection of competition could possibly be the deep look at the practise in other states, especially at the US policy of antitrust.

Clusters as a specific form of inter-organizational communication, developing a new approach to the economy and economic development, create new economic roles of business, government and non-governmental institutions, result in new communication structures in business and government, business and associated institutions. The objective of the paper is to analyze the cluster policy in Lithuania and to evaluate the effectiveness of its implementation through the medical cluster formation and development perspective. The task of the paper was to review the cluster concept prevailing in scientific literature, analyze the Lithuanian cluster policies and implementation measures, investigate the barriers of formation of clusters, evaluate the clusterization process and realities of medical companies and institutions. The object of the research is clusters policy in Lithuania. Conclusions. There is no uniform definition of a cluster in the scientific literature. The concept of clusters is treated differently, because there is no single cluster theory, there are only a number of different theories and reasoning, which try to base the logic of clusters. However, in most cases, the cluster is identified as a critical mass of companies and organizations that have achieved an outstanding success in certain areas of business, focused in a defined territory. The main reasons can be identified as hindering the clustering processes: 1) barriers arising due to market imperfections, 2) systemic imperfections arising from the policy and indirect effect of the authorities to the market operators, and 3) inadequate government action. Cluster policy as an independent competition policy is relatively new. Lithuania has no separate programming document for clustering issues so far. There is no unified cluster policy in Lithuania. Therefore, it can be stated that Lithuania is still in its target cluster policy formation stage. It is proposed to develop a unified and streamlined Lithuanian cluster policy programming document. The paper highlights the importance of continuity of ongoing national and EU structural funds incentives for the development of clustering processes. It is recommended to inform businesses about the benefits and opportunities of clustering, to publicize successful Lithuanian cluster activities and results. ; Vykstant globalios ekonomikos plėtros procesams, vis didesnę reikšmę įgyja klasteriai – vienoje geografinėje teritorijoje sutelktos, tarpusavyje sąveikaujančios, vykdančios bendrą veiklą ir savo specifine veikla papildančios viena kitą įmonės ir institucijos1. Jau senokai pasaulis, Europa, o dabar ir Lietuva suvokia klasterių svarbą ekonomikai ir nacionaliniam konkurencingumui. Straipsnyje aptariamos klasterio, kaip reiškinio, ištakos, jo formavimosi prielaidos, taip pat analizuojamos mokslinėje literatūroje vyraujančios klasterio sąvokos bei jų įvairovė. Antroje dalyje analizuojama klasterių politika Lietuvoje: valstybės požiūris į klasterizacijos procesus, jų reikalingumą, apžvelgiamos klasterių kūrimosi skatinimo priemonės bei programos, jų įgyvendinimas bei kliūtys. Trečioje darbo dalyje tiriama, kaip Lietuvos klasterių politika pasireiškia medicinos įmonių ir įstaigų klasterizacijos srityje, kokios yra medicinos klasterių kūrimosi prielaidos bei trukdžiai. Ketvirtoje dalyje yra aptariamas straipsnio autorės atliktas empirinis tyrimas, kurio tikslas – išsiaiškinti, kaip įgyvendinama valstybės vykdoma klasterių politika, vertinant jos efektyvumą bei kliūtis medicinos įmonių bei įstaigų klasterizacijos aspektu. Galiausiai, pateikiamos išvados ir pasiūlymai.