
This article questions the legal validity of the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”) in light of its enforcement practice. Adopted on the basis of Article 114 TFEU as an internal market harmonization measure, the DMA is administered by the Commission as a standing regime of unilateral conduct control that operates alongside, and in close normative proximity to, Article 102 TFEU. The resulting functional equivalence between the two instruments raises structural doubts as to the DMA’s compatibility with the constitutional framework of the Treaties.
ne bis in idem, EU economic constitution, EU competition law, internal market harmonization, ex ante regulation, Nordzucker, proportionality, Article 114 TFEU, Article 102 TFEU, Digital Markets Act (DMA), bpost
ne bis in idem, EU economic constitution, EU competition law, internal market harmonization, ex ante regulation, Nordzucker, proportionality, Article 114 TFEU, Article 102 TFEU, Digital Markets Act (DMA), bpost
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
