[1. Baarslag, Marieke, Gulbahar Tezel, and Saskia Weerheim. “The Dutch merger remedy experience.” E.C.L.R. 30(9) (2009): 447-469.]Search in Google Scholar
[2. Black, Oliver. “Competition law in Central and Eastern Europe.” E.C.L.R. 14(3) (1993): 129-134.]Search in Google Scholar
[3. Butans, Maris. “The Latvian Competition Council provisionally agrees to clear a merger if behavioral remedies are adopted (Sentor Farm Aptiekas / Recipe Plus).” e-Competitions 26666 (2009).]Search in Google Scholar
[4. Calvino, Nadia. “When do Mergers Raise Concerns? An Analysis of the Assessment Carried out by the European Commission under the New Merger Regulation.” Journal of European Competition Law & Practice 2(6) (2011): 521-528.10.1093/jeclap/lpr060]Search in Google Scholar
[5. Eichhorn, Kaarli. “The Estonian Competition Authority cleared a merger in the cider market with a commitment not to increase production above specified levels (A. Le Coq/Finelin).” e-Competitions 20956 (2003).]Search in Google Scholar
[6. Eichhorn, Kaarli. “The Estonian Competition Authority clears a merger in phase II in the markets of wholesale broadband access and retail broadband access with divestiture remedies (Elion/MicroLink).” e-Competitions 20953 (2005).]Search in Google Scholar
[7. Gal, Michal S. Competition Policy for Small Market Economies. Harvard University Press, 2003.10.4159/9780674037465]Search in Google Scholar
[8. Gal, Michal S. “Merger Policy for Small and Micro Jurisdictions”: 61-124. In: More Pros and Cons of Merger Control. Konkurrensverket, 2012.]Search in Google Scholar
[9. Gal, Michal S. “Size Does Matter: General Policy Prescriptions for Optimal Competition Rules in Small Economies.” Southern California Law Review 74 (2000-2001): 1437-1478.]Search in Google Scholar
[10. Geradin, Damien, and David Henry. “Competition Law in the New Member States - Where Do We Come From? Where Do We Go?”: 273-309. In: Damien Geradin, ed. Modernisation and Enlargement: Two Major Challenges for ECCompetition Law. Intersentia, 2005.]Search in Google Scholar
[11. Ginter, Carri and Mari Matjus. “Assessment of non-horizontal mergers in Estonia.” E.C.L.R. 31(12) (2010): 504-508.]Search in Google Scholar
[12. Hoehn, Thomas and Suzanne Rab. “UK merger remedies: convergence or conflict with Europe? A comparative assessment of remedies in UK mergers.” E.C.L.R. 30(2) (2009): 74-94.]Search in Google Scholar
[13. Hoehn, Thomas, Suzanne Rab, and Grant Saggers. “‘Breaking up is hard to do’: National merger remedies in the information and communication industries.” E.C.L.R. 30(5) (2009): 255-276.]Search in Google Scholar
[14. Horn, Henrik, and Johan Stennek. “EU merger control and small member states interests”: 83-119. In: Pros and Cons of Merger Control. Konkurrensverket, 2002.]Search in Google Scholar
[15. Kalaus, Martti. “Estonia: the new Competition Act introduces full merger control.” E.C.L.R. 23(6) (2002): 304-310.]Search in Google Scholar
[16. Kalaus, Tanel. “The Estonian Competition Authority issues its first merger prohibition taking into account both previous acquisitions and potential future acquisitions in the pharmacy services sector (Terve Pere Apteek/Saku Apteek).” e-Competitions 19964 (2008).]Search in Google Scholar
[17. Këllezi, Pranvera, and Christophe Rapin. “Merger remedies and competition law: An overview of EU and national case law.” e-Competitions 43382 (2012).]Search in Google Scholar
[18. Little, Cormac. “Remedies under Irish merger control rules.” E.C.L.R. 30(12) (2009): 600-603.]Search in Google Scholar
[19. Makauskaite, Agne. “The Lithuanian Competition Council cleared an acquisition in the market of distribution of strong alcoholic beverages with remedies, including divestiture and application of non-discriminatory pricing (Mineraliniai vandenys/Stumbras).” e-Competitions 21032 (2003).]Search in Google Scholar
[20. Makauskaite, Agne. “The Lithuanian Competition Council cleared an acquisition in the strong alcoholic beverages related market with divestiture remedy (Alita/Anykščių vynas).” e-Competitions 21036 (2004).]Search in Google Scholar
[21. Makauskaite, Agne. “The Lithuanian Competition Council cleared a merger in the markets of concrete with remedies, including commitment of nondiscriminatory pricing and various contractual provisions (Betoneta/Markučiai).” e-Competitions 21031 (2003).]Search in Google Scholar
[22. Makauskaite, Agne. “The Lithuanian Competition Council cleared in phase II a merger in the breweries market with remedies, including divestiture and certain business behavioural commitments (Carlsberg/Kalnapilis at al.).” e-Competitions 21019 (2000).]Search in Google Scholar
[23. Makauskaite, Agne. “The Lithuanian Competition Council clears a merger in the fixed, mobile and other related telecommunications markets with a commitment to notify any further structural changes (Telia/Sonera)”, e-Competitions 21023 (2002).]Search in Google Scholar
[24. Makauskaite, Agne. “The Lithuanian Competition Council clears a concentration in the wholesale and retail markets for broadband services with structural and behavioural remedies (Elion/MicroLink).” e-Competitions 21037 (2005).]Search in Google Scholar
[25. Makauskaite, Agne “The Lithuanian Competition Council clears in phase II a merger in the markets of fixed and mobile communications with structural and behavioural remedies (TeliaSonera/Omnitel).” e-Competitions 21033 (2003).]Search in Google Scholar
[26. Malinauskaite, Jurgita. “Development of merger control in the Baltic countries: over 10 years of experience: Part 1.” E.C.L.R. 32(3) (2011): 77-85.]Search in Google Scholar
[27. Malinauskaite, Jurgita. “Development of merger control in the Baltic countries: over 10 years of experience: Part 2.” E.C.L.R. 32(3) (2011): 109-115.]Search in Google Scholar
[28. Malinauskaite, Jurgita. “Efficiency tests in the merger control regimes of the Baltic countries: myth or reality.” I.C.C.L.R. 18(4) (2007): 136-146.]Search in Google Scholar
[29. Paas, Katri. “Implications of the Smallness of an Economy for Merger Remedies.” Juridica International XV (2008): 94-103.]Search in Google Scholar
[30. Paas-Mohando, Katri. “Do Small Economies Need Specific Rules for Substantive Aspects of Merger Control?” E.C.L.R. 34(5) (2013): 260-266.]Search in Google Scholar
[31. Silava-Tomsone, Dace, and Ugis Zeltins. “The Latvian NCA clears a merger in the telecommunications sector with remedies including granting of access to infrastructure (Telia Sonera).” e-Competitions 20973 (2002).]Search in Google Scholar
[32. Silava-Tomsone, Dace, and Ugis Zeltins. “The Latvian NCA cleared a merger in the alcoholic beverages distribution sector subject to remedies including granting of access to production and information (AV&D).” e-Competitions 20992 (2007).]Search in Google Scholar
[33. Silava-Tomsone, Dace, and Ugis Zeltins. “The Latvian Competition Authority clears a merger in the roadworks sector subject to behavioural remedies relating to procurement and non-discrimination obligations (A.C.B. / 8 CBR).” e-Competitions 19966 (2008).]Search in Google Scholar
[34. Silava-Tomsone, Dace, and Ugis Zeltins. “The Latvian Competition Council clears a merger in the markets for data transmission services and Internet access services subject to divestiture remedies (Lattelecom/Microlink Latvia).” e-Competitions 20979 (2005).]Search in Google Scholar
[35. Svetlicinii, Alexandr, and Külliki Lugenberg. “Merger remedies in a small market economy: the Estonian experience.” E.C.L.R. 33(10) (2012): 475-481.]Search in Google Scholar
[36. Thielert, Julia, and Maarten Pieter Schinkel. “Estonia’s competition policy: a critical evaluation towards EU accession.” E.C.L.R. 24(4) (2003): 165-175.]Search in Google Scholar
[37. Veidemane Bērziņa, Zane. “The Latvian Competition Council approves acquisition by a holding company of a number of importers and distributors of alcoholic beverages after imposing conditions (SPV Distributor / MONO).” e-Competitions 32061 (2009).]Search in Google Scholar
[38. Virtanen, Dalia. “The new Competition Act in Lithuania.” E.C.L.R. 21(1) (2000): 30-36.]Search in Google Scholar
[1. Alita/Anykščių vynas. LTCA, 27.05.2004. No. 1S-80.]Search in Google Scholar
[2. AS A.C.B./AS 8 CBR. LVCA, 02.06.2008. No. 3217/08/10/2.]Search in Google Scholar
[3. AS A. Le Coq/OÜ Finelin. EECA, 11.11.2003. No. 38-KO.]Search in Google Scholar
[4. Betoneta/Markučiai. LTCA, 25.09.2003. No. 1S-101.10.1002/bapi.200300530]Search in Google Scholar
[5. Carlsberg/Kalnapilis, et al. LTCA, 09.11.2000. No. 123.]Search in Google Scholar
[6. Commission Notice on remedies acceptable under the Council Regulation (EC)No 139/2004 and under Commission Regulation (EC) No 802/2004. Official Journal, 2008, no. C 267.]Search in Google Scholar
[7. Competition Act of the Republic of Estonia. Official Gazette, 2001, no. 56, 332.]Search in Google Scholar
[8. Competition Commission, CC8 - Merger Remedies: Competition CommissionGuidelines (November 2008) // http://www.competitioncommission. org.uk/assets/competitioncommission/docs/pdf/noninquiry/ rep_pub/rules_and_guide/pdf/cc8.pdf (accessed February 2, 2013).]Search in Google Scholar
[9. Elion Ettevõtted AS/MicroLink AS. EECA, 21.10.2005. No. 47-KO.10.1016/S1472-6483(11)60286-1]Search in Google Scholar
[10. Elion/MicroLink. LTCA, 27.10.2005. No. 1S-122.10.1093/pch/10.1.27]Search in Google Scholar
[11. Gintarinė vaistinė/Saulėgrąžų vaistinė and Thymus vaistinė. LTCA, 07.10.2011. No. 1S-208.]Search in Google Scholar
[12. HeidelbergCement Northern Europe AB/Part of NCC Roads Holding AB. EECA, 07.08.2003. No. 26-KO.]Search in Google Scholar
[13. Hoffmann-La-Roche & Co. AG v Commission. CJEU, 1979. No. 85/76.10.3917/machr1.085.0076]Search in Google Scholar
[14. ICN Merger Working Group: Analytical Framework Subgroup, MergerRemedies Review Project. Report for the fourth ICN annual conference (June 2005) // http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc323.pdf (accessed February 2, 2013).]Search in Google Scholar
[15. Lattelecom SIA/Microlink Latvia SIA. LVCA, 30.09.2005. No. 497/05/10/3.]Search in Google Scholar
[16. Mineraliniai vandenys/Stumbras. LTCA, 02.10.2003. No. 1S-107.]Search in Google Scholar
[17. MM Holding B.V./OÜ Patrika. EECA, 02.11.2007. No. 44-KO.]Search in Google Scholar
[18. OECD Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs, Competition Committee. Cross-Border Merger Control: Challenges for Developing and EmergingEconomies, Contribution from Lithuania. Document DAF/COMP/GF/WD(2010)74 (December 2010) // http://kt.gov.lt/naujienos/docs_oecd/global_forum_2011_1.pdf (accessed February 2, 2013).]Search in Google Scholar
[19. OECD Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs, Competition Committee. Merger Remedies. Document DAF/COMP/WP3(2011)2 (October 2011).]Search in Google Scholar
[20. OECD Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs, Competition Committee. Merger Remedies. Document DAF/COMP(2004)21 (December 2004) // http://www.oecd.org/competition/mergers/34305995.pdf (accessed February 2, 2013).]Search in Google Scholar
[21. Regulation No. 139/2004 On the Control of Concentrations BetweenUndertakings. Official Journal, 2004, L24/1.]Search in Google Scholar
[22. Sentor Farm aptiekas/Recipe Plus. LVCA, 23.01.2009. No. 2754/08/06/21.]Search in Google Scholar
[23. S.P.I. Worldwide Trade Limited/AV&D SIA/Interlat SIA. LVCA, 08.10.2007. No. 1300/07/06/18.]Search in Google Scholar
[24. SPV Distributor v. S.D.V./L.D.V./MONO M/S.Alko. LVCA, 19.06.2009. No. 651/09/06/4.]Search in Google Scholar
[25. Telia AB/Sonera Corporation. EECA, 25.09.2002. No. 58-KO.10.1023/A:1015868532314]Search in Google Scholar
[26. Telia/Sonera. EU Commission, 2002. No. COMP/M2803.]Search in Google Scholar
[27. Telia/Sonera. LTCA, 18.07.2002. No. 82.10.1016/S0267-3649(02)03001-7]Search in Google Scholar
[28. TeliaSonera/Omnitel. LTCA, 11.12.2003. No. 1S-140.]Search in Google Scholar
[29. Telia/Sonera/Swedgiro AB. LVCA, 13.08.2002. No. 124.10.1023/A:1017499314204]Search in Google Scholar
[30. Terve Pere Apteek OÜ/OÜ Saku Apteek. EECA, 08.05.2008. No. 3.1-8/08-020KO.]Search in Google Scholar
[31. United Brands Company and United Brands Continentaal BV v Commission. CJEU, 1978. No. 27/76.]Search in Google Scholar
[32. US Department of Justice, Antitrust Division. Policy Guide to Merger Remedies (June 2011) // http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/272350.pdf (accessed February 2, 2013). ]Search in Google Scholar
