Cristina Teleki, Ph.D. (2020) is a lawyer who worked at the European Court of Human Rights, the European Commission and the International Committee of the Red Cross. Her research focuses on fundamental rights and EU law.

• List of Tables and FiguresAcknowledgementsIntroduction1 Scope2 MethodologyPART 1Foundations1 Central Issues of Research1.1 EU Competition Law – A Paradox within EU Law1.2 The ECtHR – System Design as a Predictor of Success1.3 ECtHR as a Self-Regulating Tribunal2 Supporting Issues2.1 Systems Theory and Social Sciences2.2 The New Public Management Movement2.3 Peoples, Consumers and Citizens2.4 Accession of the EU to the echr2.5 The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU3 A Foot in the Past: Existing Literature3.1 Legal Philosophy3.2 A Renewed Debate on Human Rights3.3 A Renewed Imagining of the Trial3.4 Competition Policy3.5 Competition Policy and Fundamental RightsPART 2The Dynamic Evolution of the Right to a Fair TrialIntroduction to Part 24 The Right to a Fair Trial4.1 Formulation and Importance of Article 6(1) echr4.2 Influence of the Case-law of the ECtHR on Domestic Legislation4.3 External Influences on the Case-law of the ECtHR5 Applicability of Article 6(1) ECHR5.1 Maintaining Pockets of State Sovereignty5.2 Applicability of Article 6(1) ECHR to “Civil Rights and Obligations”5.3 Applicability of Article 6(1) ECHR to “Criminal Charges”6 The Right to a Fair Trial – A Tool for Self-Regulation6.1 The Process Towards Justiciability6.2 The Role Played by the Academic Community6.3 The Zeitgeist6.4 Cooperation with the ECtHR – Four Possible ModelsPART 3Fair Trial and the Independence of the Commission as the Competition Enforcement Agency of the EUIntroduction to Part 37 The Debate on Independence at the Crossroads of the Administrative State, Delegation and IRA s7.1 The Rise of the Administrative State, Delegation and IRA s7.2 The UNCTAD7.3 oecd Roundtable on Changes in Institutional Design of Competition Authorities7.4 International Competition Network7.5 Independence of European Regulators7.6 The European Competition Network7.7 Empowering NCA s – Directive 1/20197.8 The Difficult Case for the Independence of the European Commission8 The Case-law of the ECtHR on the Right to an Independent and Impartial Tribunal8.1 Established by Law8.2 Independence8.3 Impartiality8.4 The Relevance of the ECtHR’s Case-Law on Independence and Impartiality9 The Structure of the European Commission as Enforcer of Competition Law9.1 The European Commission as a Political Institution9.2 The European Commission as an Autonomous Bureaucracy10 The Procedure for Enforcement of Article 101 and 102 tfeu10.1 The Investigation Phase10.2 Prohibition Procedure10.3 Commitments Procedure10.4 Procedure for Rejection of Complaints10.5 Settlement Procedures11 The Commission’s Powers of Investigation11.1 Sanctions11.2 Leniency11.3 Sector Inquiries11.4 Requests for Information11.5 The Power to Take Statements11.6 Powers of Inspection12 Limits on the Commission’s Powers of Investigation12.1 General Principles of Limitation12.2 The Rights of the Defence13 A Risk-Based Framework for Safeguarding the European Commission’s Independence13.1 Identifying the Risks to Independence in EU Competition Law Proceedings13.2 Mitigating the Identified RisksPART 4Fair Trial and Judicial Review of EU Competition LawIntroduction to Part 414 Case-law of the ECtHR on the Right to an Effective Judicial Review14.1 Judicial Review in Administrative Law Disputes14.2 Judicial Review in Disputes Involving “Criminal Charges”14.3 Judicial Review in Banking Law Disputes14.4 Non-Pecuniary Damage for Breach of the Right to Judicial Review15 Relevance of the ECtHR’s Case-law on the Right to Judicial Review – A Story of Three Models15.1 Exercise of Administrative Discretion within Polycentric Issues15.2 Exercise of Administrative Discretion for Monocentric Issues15.3 Exercise of Administrative Discretion as Policing Power16 Case-law of EU Courts on the Right to an Effective Judicial Review16.1 Right to Effective Judicial Protection16.2 Right to Judicial Review in Competition Law cases – A Matter of Constitutional Design16.3 Limited Review of Legality – Design by Self-Interpretation16.4 Unlimited Review of Fines16.5 Margin of Appreciation of the EU Commission and Unlimited Review of Fines16.6 The Right to a Fair Legal Process in EU Law17 Is Judicial Review A Cure for Bigness?17.1 Adjudication and Economic Evidence17.2 Adjudication and the Administrative Man17.3 Adjudication, Bias and Monoculture17.4 Adjudication and Problems of Organized ComplexityStep into the Future: Bigness and Judicial PowerWorks CitedIndex