Brott utan straff? - EU:s regler om eftergift vid konkurrensrättsliga överträdelser i svensk rätt

Sammanfattning: As the EU has become an important role for the reciprocal trade between the acceding Member States, the legal order of EU has had an effect on some of the national legal systems. A relatively new system has been voluntarily introduced into the Swedish law, with the purpose to combat competitive cross-collaborations like cartels. This cartel enforcement order, known as the Leniency system, has not previously been known to the Swedish legal culture. The purpose of this paper is to find out how the Swedish justice system has adapted the Leniency system from EU, in the light of the ancient legal traditions. Critism is pointed at how the system can be defended, when a party that violates the Competition Act can be released from some sort of penalty by letting on about the existence of a cartel that he self-starred in. What also will be considered, is whether there is a requirement for adjustment to EU, when it comes to the Leniency system which is regulated by the secondary law of EU. The questions in the paper are the follwing: 1) Are there any obligations for Sweden to introduce the rules regulated by EU on remission following the model of the Leniency program and Regulation 1/2003 into the Swedish Compettition Act? 2) To what extent has Sweden considered the cultural differences between EU law and Swedish law when it introduced provisions on immunity in the Swedish Competition Act? The paper presents the following answeres: Today there are no obligations who says that Sweden has to adjust to the Leniency system from EU. The only obligation there is, is when the criterium of reciprocal trade is achieved between the Member States. When it comes to the cultural differences between Sweden and EU, there seems to have been a larger profit in introducing the Leniency system rather than keeping on to the old legal traditions.