Daniel Mândrescu

Ph.D. Fellow, Europa Institute, Leiden University and CoRe Blog Editor

Daniel Mândrescu is a Ph.D. Fellow at the Europa Institute of Leiden University. His research focuses on the application of EU competition law to the business practices of online platforms with the purpose of establishing whether there is need for specific regulation or merely an adaption of current practice.

Prior to his affiliation with Leiden University Daniel was assistant to the editorial team of the legal journal Legal Issues of Economic Integration (Kluwer) and a graduate teaching assistant at the University of Amsterdam.

Daniel obtained his LLB (2012) and a dual LLM degree on International Trade Law and EU Competition law and Regulation (2014) from the University of Amsterdam. During his studies he worked as an intern in the competition law practices of Allen & Overy and Loyens & Loeff and became a member of the Dutch Competition law Association.

---

CoRe Blog posts published by Daniel:

• Why you (often) don’t need the essential facility doctrine in the digital economy? – Interpreting Lithuanian Railways and Slovak Telekom on 03 December 2020
• Lithuanian Railways and Slovak Telecom – Implications for the Essential Facility Doctrine on 26 November 2020
• Epic v Apple (2): market power and foreclosure in the app distribution market(s) on 22 September 2020
• Slack v. Microsoft – more than just another tying case on 27 August 2020
• Restrictions of competition by object and multi-sided platforms – insights from Budapest Bank on 14 May 2020
• Lessons and questions from Google Android- Part 2 – Tying in two-sided markets, anti-competitive effects and extra-territorial remedies on 29 November 2019
• Lessons and questions from Google Android- Part 1 – the market definition on 29 October 2019
• Ex-ante competition law enforcement and online platforms – a tool with no (clear) instructions on 06 September 2019
• The return of the MFN clauses – platform ranking as an enforcement mechanism for price parity on 26 June 2019
• App stores and (potential) abuses of dominance – an opportunity to reshape competition law enforcement in digital markets on 14 May 2019
• Business users vs. platforms – a (not entirely) new battle frontier on 21 March 2019
• Abuse of dominance through data overcharges and EU competition law enforcement on 18 January 2019
• Apple’s App Store commission fee and (anti-competitive) governance: when a platform’s zero-pricing strategy becomes expensive on 29 November 2018
• Recap of the 2nd CoRe conference, 24 Oct. 2018 on 30 October 2018
• Market definition for two-(or multi) sided platforms – demand interdependence and substitution as guiding principles on 18 September 2018
• Price monitoring software and competition – new possibilities for RPM in absence of sufficient deterrence on 07 August 2018
• Tales of two-sided markets, market definitions and anti-competitive effects – insights from Ohio v. American Express on 17 July 2018
• When Algorithmic Pricing meets Concerted Practices – the case of Partneo on 07 June 2018
• Online platforms and refusal to deal – Unlockd vs. Google – a seminal case in the making? on 18 May 2018
• Price discrimination and abuse of dominance – MEO Case C-525/16 on 01 May 2018
• Online platforms and abuse of dominance – the case of Funda Real Estate on 06 April 2018
• When the industry strikes back – UPS claims 1.7 billion Euro for the blocked merger with TNT on 03 April 2018
• The first judgement of 2018: Hoffman-La Roche v AGCM (Case C- 179/16) – a remarkable case for its unremarkable implications on 08 March 2018