Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Strengthening Interim Measures in EU Competition Law
View through CrossRef
This research project was conducted between December 2020 and April 2025, with funding provided by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (DOI 10.54499/2020.08417.BD). It examines the powers available to the European Commission to enforce the competition rules applicable to undertakings in Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, especially in the context of digital markets. More specifically, it focuses on the Commission’s power under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 to order interim measures in urgent situations while an investigation is still ongoing.
The scope and overall objective of the research project is to answer the following overarching Research Question: To what extent can the Commission’s power to order interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 contribute to enhancing the effective enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, especially in the context of digital markets?
This central research question is broken down in the following four Sub-Questions, each examined in a separate academic article: (A) What are the key characteristics of the Commission’s power to order interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003, and how do these features define its role, guide its exercise, and shape the permissible scope of interim intervention? (B) Can the Commission order interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 in cases involving novel or complex legal or factual issues, as frequently encountered in investigations concerning digital markets, or are such measures reserved for more straightforward situations? (C) What synergies can be identified between Regulation 1/2003 and the DMA regarding the Commission’s powers to order interim measures in digital markets, as established respectively in Articles 8 and 24 of those Regulations? (D) Do the procedural requirements for ordering interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 strike an appropriate balance between the rights of the undertakings being investigated and the urgency that justifies interim intervention? If not, what reforms could better reconcile these competing interests?
Provided that certain recommendations and safeguards outlined are implemented, the analysis supports a positive answer to the overarching Research Question: the Commission’s power to order interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 can significantly contribute to enhancing the effective enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, particularly in the fast-moving context of digital markets, where urgency is often a hallmark of timely and meaningful competition law intervention.
Title: Strengthening Interim Measures in EU Competition Law
Description:
This research project was conducted between December 2020 and April 2025, with funding provided by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (DOI 10.
54499/2020.
08417.
BD).
It examines the powers available to the European Commission to enforce the competition rules applicable to undertakings in Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, especially in the context of digital markets.
More specifically, it focuses on the Commission’s power under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 to order interim measures in urgent situations while an investigation is still ongoing.
The scope and overall objective of the research project is to answer the following overarching Research Question: To what extent can the Commission’s power to order interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 contribute to enhancing the effective enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, especially in the context of digital markets?
This central research question is broken down in the following four Sub-Questions, each examined in a separate academic article: (A) What are the key characteristics of the Commission’s power to order interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003, and how do these features define its role, guide its exercise, and shape the permissible scope of interim intervention? (B) Can the Commission order interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 in cases involving novel or complex legal or factual issues, as frequently encountered in investigations concerning digital markets, or are such measures reserved for more straightforward situations? (C) What synergies can be identified between Regulation 1/2003 and the DMA regarding the Commission’s powers to order interim measures in digital markets, as established respectively in Articles 8 and 24 of those Regulations? (D) Do the procedural requirements for ordering interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 strike an appropriate balance between the rights of the undertakings being investigated and the urgency that justifies interim intervention? If not, what reforms could better reconcile these competing interests?
Provided that certain recommendations and safeguards outlined are implemented, the analysis supports a positive answer to the overarching Research Question: the Commission’s power to order interim measures under Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 can significantly contribute to enhancing the effective enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, particularly in the fast-moving context of digital markets, where urgency is often a hallmark of timely and meaningful competition law intervention.
Related Results
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere
From Constitutional Comparison to Life in the Biosphere is a monograph that argues for a fundamental reorientation of constitutional law around the realities of biospheric interdep...
Mezinárodní právo na prahu 21. století (dosažený stav, neúspěchy a perspektivy)
Mezinárodní právo na prahu 21. století (dosažený stav, neúspěchy a perspektivy)
The study deal with selected problems of international law at the time of change of the 20th and 21st centuries. Such a milestone gives an opportunity to review the achieved state ...
Paul’s view of the law in Romans and the Ethiopic tradition
Paul’s view of the law in Romans and the Ethiopic tradition
ABSTRACT
This dissertation examines Paul’s view of the law in Romans, interacting with modern exegetical traditions addressing the Old, New, and Radical New Perspectives, aiming to...
Envisioning Originalism Applied to Bioethics Cases
Envisioning Originalism Applied to Bioethics Cases
Photo ID 123697425 © Alexandersikov | Dreamstime.com
Abstract
Originalism is an increasingly prevalent method for interpreting provisions of the US Constitution. It requires strict...
Editorial: Complexity of Medical Law
Editorial: Complexity of Medical Law
If one puts forward a question what medical law is all about, the common answer will be medical mishaps as result of clinical negligence leading to lawsuit and/or inquires of disci...
International Construction Law
International Construction Law
International law is a body of legally binding norms that regulate relations between the subjects of the international legal system and structure the functioning of the internation...
Interim Anti-Suit Injunctions
Interim Anti-Suit Injunctions
Abstract
This chapter examines interim anti-suit injunctions. Most anti-suit injunctions are sought and granted on an interim basis. The need to pre-empt hearings in...
Atypical business law provisions
Atypical business law provisions
The article is devoted to the vision of atypical business law provisions. It was found that the state of scientific opinion regarding atypical business law provisions is irrelevant...

