LCF25 - Competition law at the crossroads: Polish insights on EU antitrust

LCF25 - Competition law at the crossroads: Polish insights on EU antitrust

🎙 Modrzejewski i Wspólnicy (speakers: Piotr Modrzejewski, Jan Machocki, Andrzej Poczobut) 👥 294 📅 October 1, 2025 ⏱ 51 min 👁 87 📄 expert opinion 🧭 2026-08-16
Available in: English (current) Français

Keywords

abuse of dominanceprivate enforcementlabor marketno-poach agreementsGoogle Shopping

Summary

This panel discussion, part of the Lear Competition Festival 2025, provides insights into recent Polish competition law cases and their implications for EU antitrust. The speakers, lawyers from Modrzejewski i Wspólnicy, first discuss a successful defense in an abuse of dominance case involving bundling of TV channels by two major broadcasters. They highlight the Polish competition authority’s extensive market survey and the debate over single-brand market definition. Next, they examine a private enforcement case against Google Shopping, where a Polish platform obtained an injunction based on the probability of damage, marking a potential shift in Polish private enforcement. Finally, they address the emerging topic of competition law in labor markets, focusing on the Biedronka case involving alleged no-poach agreements with transport companies, and discuss whether such agreements should be assessed by object or effect, referencing the recent CJEU opinion in the CD Tondela case. The discussion underscores the evolving nature of antitrust enforcement in Poland and the EU.

158 words

Critical Evaluation

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The video offers valuable insights from practitioners directly involved in the cases, providing a unique insider perspective on the reasoning of the Polish competition authority and the strategic considerations in antitrust litigation. The argumentation is generally solid, with speakers explaining the legal and economic reasoning behind their positions, such as the substitutability of TV channels and the potential benefits of interim measures in private enforcement. However, some arguments are presented as opinions without deep empirical support, and the discussion on labor market agreements is speculative due to the ongoing nature of the case.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The speakers demonstrate a strong command of relevant case law, referencing key EU judgments such as United Brands, Google Shopping, and recent CJEU rulings like RH v Volvo and Scanska. However, they do not provide formal citations or links to sources, and the discussion relies heavily on their professional experience. The title accurately reflects the content, which focuses on Polish competition law developments and their EU implications. No comments were provided for analysis.

181 words

Title / Content Match

The title accurately reflects the content, which discusses Polish competition law cases and their implications for EU antitrust.

Quality & Reliability

7/10

The video features experienced competition lawyers discussing recent Polish and EU antitrust cases, providing insider perspectives on a case they represented. However, it is a panel discussion without formal citations or peer review, and some claims are based on public information and personal opinions.

Key Moments

Cited Sources

  • United Brands case — Referenced in discussion of single-brand market definition.
  • Google Shopping case — Referenced in private enforcement discussion.
  • RH v Volvo case — Referenced as recent CJEU ruling aiding private enforcement.
  • Scanska case — Referenced regarding successor liability.
  • CD Tondela case — Referenced in labor market agreements discussion.

Concurring Sources

Contribution & Novelties

The video provides a practitioner’s perspective on recent Polish competition law cases, offering insights not typically found in academic literature. It highlights the practical challenges of market definition in media markets and the potential of interim measures to boost private enforcement. The discussion on labor market agreements is timely and contributes to the ongoing debate on how competition law should address no-poach and wage-fixing agreements.

Pour aller plus loin :

128 words

Radar Profile

The radar profile shows balanced scores across all dimensions, indicating a well-rounded presentation with solid information quality and technical depth, though not exceptional in any single area.

Reliability 7/10