3

Les pratiques anticoncurrentielles ou les pratiques restrictives de concurrence internationale ont beaucoup augmenté avec la mondialisation, et parmi elles, celles qui concernent les abus de puissance économique. Cela rend d’autant plus importante leur confrontation avec les règles de droit international privé. Le droit positif révèle qu’il y a dans les textes et la jurisprudence un objectif perfectible de concentration autour de la loi du marché, cette loi coïncidant au demeurant le plus souvent avec les lois de police applicables, ce qui est un facteur favorisant le respect de l’impérativité de ces dernières. Cependant, cet objectif de concentration autour de la loi du marché coïncidant avec la plupart des lois de police pourrait parfois être compromis. En effet, les opérateurs eux-mêmes, en choisissant leur juge ou leur arbitre pour échapper au juge du marché en principe normalement compétent en tant que juge du lieu du dommage, auraient les moyens d’adopter des stratégies opportunistes de contournement des lois de police.

ABUSE OF ECONOMIC DOMINANCE AND PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW We witnessed an increased internationalization of anti competitive practices and restrictive business practices, among which abuses of economic dominance could be mentioned. This phenomenon, a major consequence of the globalization of the economy, makes the interfaces between economic law and private international law complex and of paramount importance. It stems from statutory economic laws and case laws a perfectible objective to address the international anti competitive practices by applying mandatory economic laws in regulating the market behavior of the international undertakings, i.e., competition law rules. The mandatory character of the economic law rules regulating the market not only ensures their self enforcement, but also guarantees their respect by the economic actors. However, the mandatory character of these rules can be undermined by the principle of party autonomy which is recognized by private international law. Hence, the contractual freedom to choose an applicable law, to conclude a choice of forum agreements and to solve their litigation by arbitration are “legal tools” that the economic actors can use to hinder the mandatory character of the rules regulating the economic behavior within the market. By using these very tools that private international law makes available to them, undertakings are able to elaborate litigation strategies that allow them to circumvent the mandatory character of these rules to their own selfish economic interests.