Marco D'ALBERTI - Professor (université de Rome "La Sapienza")
Benoît PLESSIX - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
Paolo LAZZARA - Professor (université Rome III)
Sophie NICINSKI - Professor
Vincenzo CERULLI IRELLI - Professor (université La Sapienza - Rome)
Yves GAUDEMET - Professor (université Paris 2 Panthéon-Assas)
Judicial review of antitrust authorities' decisions shows as extremely variable. This justified an effort of theoretical explanation and demanded the elucidation of several intermediate questions. The technical nature of the economic subject accounts for a specific institutional model (the independent agencies one), a given type of norms (through standards and indeterminate concepts), a peculiar form of discretionary power (defined mixt: both pure an technical). Considering all these elements, we defined the ideal reach of judicial review. The first element, the independent nature of authorities, dictates to wonder on the boundaries between confrontational administration and trial, but also on the boundaries between administration and politics. The second element, related to the structure of the norm, provokes a reflection on the necessity that the administration completes the legal prescription while applying it, somehow participating to the definition of her own power's legitimacy requirements. The third element recalled, the mixt nature of discretionary power, led to redefine the reasons of the analogy between jurisdictional control on opportunity and on technical administrative evaluations. The instrument used to carry out the described analysis is the principle of proportionality, tool of administrative action but also instrument of judicial review, that permitted to reveal the affinity between administrative and jurisdictional paradigms that founds the observed uncertainties.