The fact that US competition law is based on the common law system and EU competition law on the civil law system seems to be a big difference at first glance. In fact, Community competition law is contained in very few general articles of the EC Treaty. Although the Commission`s decisions have no precedent as in a common law system, Community competition law is refined by the Commission through court decisions. As in common law, cases are researched when working with Community competition law.  – First, the Parties could commit to establishing national competitive structures. This would mean basic competition rules for restrictive business practices, abuses of market power and mergers. Of course, the mere adoption of national legislation does not guarantee that competition law will be applied effectively. Nor does it guarantee that there is no discrimination between domestic and foreign companies. That legislation should therefore be accompanied by appropriate implementing provisions and a right of access for undertakings to national enforcement authorities and national courts.
The argument of diversity is also exaggerated. First, there is already consensus on the need to adopt national competition laws on the basis of common principles. In addition, WTO Members that have recently adopted or are in the process of adopting national competition laws have clearly sought principles that have already been adopted by countries with greater experience in this area. This is a clear sign of global convergence. Several institutional arguments are in favour of choosing the WTO as a negotiating forum and creating an international framework for competition rules. Most importantly, the WTO is an almost universal member and can provide a balanced response to the interests of both developed and developing countries. We must not underestimate the advantages of involving the wider international community in the debate on international competition or the disadvantages of excluding it. This is one of the so-called new topics of the WTO, which deals with how national and international competition policy instruments such as antitrust laws or competition law interact with international trade.
The WTO Working Group on the Interaction between Trade policy and competition policy was established at the Singapore Ministerial Conference in December 1996 to examine issues raised by Members with regard to the interaction of these two policy areas. (As the mandate derives from the 1996 Singapore Ministerial Conference, trade and competition policy is sometimes described as one of the four Singapore issues.) Others argue that these practices can only have a market-closing effect if they are supported by government measures that restrict access to the market itself. Hong Kong drew the attention of the WTO Working Group to this point and proposed to continue to focus on barriers to state access to markets and distortions of competition in markets, thus defusing the basis on which private anti-competitive behaviour can take place.  I will start with some of the reasons why I consider a multilateral agreement on competition to be necessary. In today`s global economy, there are many anti-competitive practices that have an international dimension and therefore fall within the competence of various competition authorities. This can lead to conflicts of laws and jurisdictions and make it more difficult for competition authorities to deal with cross-border restrictive practices. A number of countries have already concluded or are in the process of concluding cooperation agreements between their competition authorities. In addition, many international agreements, whether bilateral or sectoral, contain provisions on competition […].