Unresolved Questions Regarding Lawyers’ Fees and the Restriction of Competition

Main Article Content

Fabio Ferraro
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0992-9823

Abstract

This paper explores the most salient aspects of the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on legal services in order to highlight a lack of clarity in defining the terms of compatibility between European Union law and national rules on lawyers’ fees. This is a complex issue and one that has not yet been finally resolved, especially in a difficult context such as that of the Italian market, which is characterised by an extremely large number of lawyers, which in itself entails the risk of deterioration in the quality of services provided, with services being offered at a discount. In Italy, following the Cipolla judgment of the ECJ and the resulting abolition of the system of fixed remuneration (minimum and maximum fees), new measures were introduced by the State and professional organisations to protect members of the legal profession (particularly to safeguard lawyers in a weaker position in dealings with powerful clients such as banks and insurance companies) and to ensure fair remuneration. In accordance with the Wouters exemption and the increasing role of economic analysis in competition rules, these measures require a reflective analytical approach in order to evaluate their compatibility with European Union law.

Keywords: Lawyers’ fees, Fair remuneration, Professional organisation, Wouters exemption, Italian market

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Amorese, Marco. “Cases C-94/04, Cippola & Macrino: The emergence of a political approach to the regulation of professionals in Europe?”. The Columbia Journal of European Law, 2007, 733-745.

Bastianon, Stefano. “Due pronunce, tanti problemi, nessuna soluzione: Ovvero gli avvocati e l’antitrust secondo la Corte di giustizia”. Il Foro Italiano, 2002, IV, 188-197.

Carbone, Sergio Maria and Munari Francesco. “L’indagine conoscitiva dell’Autorità Garante della concorrenza e del mercato sugli ordini e collegi professionali ed il suo possibile impatto sull’avvocatura”. Concorrenza e Mercato, 1995, Milano, 411-448.

Decocq, Georges. “La législation espagnole relative aux honoraires des avoués n’est pas contraire à la prohibition des ententes”. Revue de Jurisprudence Commerciale, 2017, 49-54.

Ehlermann, Claus-Dieter. “Concurrence et profession libérales: Antagonisme ou compatibilité?”. Revue Marché Commun, 1993, 136-144.

Ferraro, Fabio. L’Avvocato Comunitario. Naples, 2005.

Ferraro, Pietro Paolo. “Il divieto di abuso di dipendenza economica del professionista”. Gazzetta Forense, 2017, no. 5, 928-936.

Frese, Michael J. and Herman J. van Harten. “How extravagant the fees of counsellors at law sometimes appear, competition law and internal market constraints to fixed remuneration schemes”. Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 2007, 393-405.

Gilliams, Hans. “Competition law and public interest: Do we need to change the law for the (liberal) professions?”. In European Competition Law Annual 2004: The Relationship between Competition Law and the (Liberal) Professions, edited by Claus-Dieter Ehlermann and Isabela Atanasiu. Oxford: Hart, 2006.

Illmer, Martin. “Lawyers’ Fees and Access to Justice – the Cipolla and Macrino judgment of the ECJ (Joined Cases C-94/04 and C-202/04)”. Civil Justice Quarterly, 2007, 301-309.

Loozen, Edith. “Professional ethics and restraints of competition”. European Law Review, 2006, 28-47.

Manzini, Pietro. “I parafernali del giudizio antitrust: regola della ragionevolezza, restrizioni accessorie, divieto ‘per se”’. Giurisprudenza Commerciale II (2003), 285-296.

Monti, Mario. “Competition in professional services: New lights and new challenges”. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/speeches/text/sp2003_070_en.pdf.

Nascimbene, Bruno. “Tariffe professionali e norme sulla concorrenza fra giudice comunitario e giudice nazionale”. Contratto Impresa/Europa, 1997, 482-497.

Nyssens, Harold, “Concurrence et ordre professionnels; les trompettes de Jéricho sonnent-elles?”. Revue de Droit Commercial Belge, 1999, 475-489.

O’Loughlin, Rosemary. “EC competition rules and free movement rules: An examination of the parallels and their furtherance by the ECJ Wouters decision”. European Competition Law Review, 2003, 62-69.

Rodríguez Rodrigo, Juliana. “Aplicación del derecho de la competencia a los baremos de honorarios de abogados: Arduino y Cipolla”. La Unión Europea ante el Derecho de la Globalización, 2008, 433-468.

Scarselli, Giuliano. “Il compenso professionale tra decoro e libera professione”. Il Foro Italiano, 2012, 374-377.

Scassellati, Sforzolini Giuseppe, Rizza Cesare. “La tensione fra regole di concorrenza comunitarie e regole professionali e deontologiche nazionali”. Giurisprudenza Commerciale, 2003, 8-40.

Siragusa, Mario. “Critical remarks on the Commission’s Legal analysis in its Report on Competition in Professional Services”. In European Competition Law Annual 2004: The Relationship between Competition Law and the (Liberal) Professions, edited by Claus-Dieter Ehlermann and Isabela Atanasiu. Oxford: 2006, 583-590. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472559883.ch-022

Vossestein, Adrian J. “Case C-35/99, Arduino, Judgment of 19 February 2000, Full Court; Case C-309/99, Wouters et al. v. Algemene Raad van de Nederlandse Orde van Advocaten, Judgment of 19 February 2002, Full Court”. Common Market Law Review, 2002, 841-863.

Wendt, Ida E. “EU Competition Law and liberal professions: An uneasy relationship?”. Leiden: Martinus Niijoff Publishers, 2012.