Economic and Legal Implications for the EU Member States
Edited by Katalin J. Cseres, Maarten Pieter Schinkel and Floris O.W. Vogelaar
Chapter 8: Requests for Leniency in the EU: Experience and Legal Puzzles
Dirk Schroeder and Silke Heinz 1 INTRODUCTION The European Commission’s leniency program has been a success.1 By 17 November 2004, the Commission had received 92 leniency applications under its revised leniency notice of 20022 (hereinafter the ‘Commission 2002 Leniency Notice’).3 These applications led to over 38 conditional immunity decisions. The large majority, namely 70, of the applications originated from companies situated within the EU,4 while 17 came from outside the EU (including non-EU corporations with EU subsidiaries),5 with ﬁve applications not indicating a link to a particular country or indicating a link to more than one country. In addition, there is a trend towards a growing number of leniency applications: Commissioner Neelie Kroes reported that, while DG COMP received 16 applications in 2003, the number of requests almost doubled to 29 in 2004.6 However, the leniency program could have been, and could become, an even greater success were leniency regimes not as diverse as is currently the case, and were the application process for leniency more efﬁcient throughout Europe. Leniency is an area in which uniform rules do not exist throughout the EU. Currently, the Commission and 17 Member States have leniency programs. Eight Member States do not provide for leniency; these are Austria, Denmark, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain.7 Moreover, there are differences between the existing programs. This chapter will highlight such differences, both in law and in practice, illustrate possible problems arising from the differences and put forward possible solutions.8 Finally, the...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.