CoRe 2/2023 – Vertical Distribution Agreements and Ex Ante Regulation of Multimodal Digital Mobility Services

Become an author for CoRe and view our Call for Papers.
Download our Author Guidelines.

I. Submission

Spontaneous contributions are welcome and should be sent by e-mail to the Executive Editor Nelly Stratieva.

II. Quality Statement, Editorial Review and General Terms of Publication

Only submissions of excellent quality will be accepted in CoRe. Responsibility of the factual accuracy of a paper rests entirely with the author. All publications must clearly distinguish themselves from the status quo of discussions – in particular through sufficiently broad publication footnoting and referencing – and provide an added value to those discussions. Contributions should not have been published, nor be pending publication elsewhere.
Whereas country reports and case notes may be more factual and focussed, articles must rely on preexisting literature and jurisprudence, even if the positions expressed there are to be contradicted. Likewise, submissions relating to very recent developments require less footnoting and referencing than submissions relating to familiar topics.

Publications not up to this quality standard will be rejected.

The manuscript must also be complete and final in terms of formulation and factual information so that no major corrections – only of type-setting errors or the like – will be necessary after type-setting, when an edited version will be returned to the author. Subsequent requests for corrections cannot be processed.

Manuscripts which have been wholly, substantially, or substantively generated from AI, machine learning, or similar algorithmic tools cannot be published in CoRe. If authors deploy generative AI in the course of their research, they must reference in a footnote generative AI as personal communications for OSCOLA (see Section V for example). Generative AI cannot be listed as an author or co-author of a paper, nor can AI be cited in the references as an author.

III. Peer Review

To ensure the high quality of the journal, all article submissions will be subject to double blind peer review. Country reports, case notes and book reviews submissions will be subject to a simplified peer review process.

Authors are obliged to take part in the review process by remaining available for any changes, modifications, improvements etc as may be required by reviewers or the editorial team. These shall be considered as mandatory conditions for publication; authors shall strive to adopt them to the widest possible extent. Clear and objective justification shall be given by authors if any request has not been met. The editorial team reserves the right to return any insufficiently modified contribution to authors for further work, or to reject its publication.

1.      Article Review

All articles submitted for publication in CoRe undergo a double blind peer review process.

Article submissions are addressed to the executive editor of CoRe who is charged with deciding if the article fits with the general thematic and quality scope of the journal. If the submission passes this check, the executive editor forwards an anonymised version of the article submission to two independent peer reviewers. Reviewers are chosen based on their topical specialities, work and publication history, and shall be objective, independent and free of conflicts of interest. The choice and assignment of reviewers is at the sole discretion of the editorial team; details thereof shall not be discussed or made public, and authors may not make any requests in this regard. The identities of both authors and reviewers shall be protected as much as possible from each other and from any other parties, with the exception of the editorial team.

The first reviewer is a member of the Editorial Board of CoRe. The second reviewer is a member of CoRe’s Scientific Advisory Committee – a standing group of expert reviewers who perform reviews for the journal on a regular basis – or another affiliated expert with knowledge on the topic of the article. The two reviewers are asked to fill in a Review Sheet where they indicate if the article is approved for publication and what revisions (if any) should be done by the author. If the two reviewers disagree whether the article should be published or not, the article is forwarded to a third reviewer whose decision is final.

Authors of accepted articles may still be asked to revise their draft in order to incorporate the feedback of reviewers. One or both reviewers may be asked to do a second review of the revised draft to check if the requested revision was adequately completed.

As a final step, after the content of the article is approved, the text undergoes language and formatting editing.

2.      Case Note Review

Case note submissions are addressed to the executive editor or the case notes editor. The case notes editor reviews and provides feedback to the authors on their submissions. This is not a blind process. The case notes editor may request that the author revises and improves their draft.

3.      Report Review

The majority of country reports are written by CoRe’s network of designated country correspondents. The correspondents are selected on the basis of their distinguished knowledge in the competition and/or regulatory law of a particular EU Member State. It is occasionally possible for a country report to be submitted by an author who is not a country correspondent. If the report is on a country for which CoRe has an appointed country correspondent, that correspondent is asked to review the report submission. If the report is on an EU Member State for which there is no designated country correspondent, the executive or the managing editors will act as reviewer. This is not a blind process.

The final version of the report undergoes language and formatting editing.

4.      Book Review

Book reviews are submitted to the executive editor or the book reviews editor. The book reviews editor checks the quality of the submission and provides feedback to the authors. This is not a blind process. The book reviews editor may request that the author revises and improves their draft.

The final version of the book review undergoes language and formatting editing.

IV. Format and Style

All contributions must comply with the minimum formatting requirements laid out hereunder. Contributions not respecting these formatting requirements will be returned to the author.

5.      Format and Length

a.       Articles

Articles should be between 4000–8000 words (including footnotes) in length. (MS Word Format, in British English). All contributions use footnotes, but not a list of references. Longer articles are accepted on a case-by-case basis if more space is required by the topic. Each article is preceded by a short abstract (without heading) of five to six sentences.

b.      Case Notes

Case notes should be between 2000–3000 words (including footnotes) in length. Their overall structure shall be divided in the Facts, the Judgment and the Comment. The case note shall be headed by a short headline in bold that summarises the main issue of the case and the refe-rence of the case in Italics, including its publication in the official journal of the respective Court. Case notes discuss rulings by the European Courts; national judgments are covered as a country report. In cases where the judgment is not (yet) final, this fact shall be indicated.

c.       Country Reports

Country reports should be between 2000-3500 words (including footnotes) in length. They highlight a topic of particular interest relating to legal developments in the EU Member States or third countries with a clear to European competition and regulatory law. The reports provide readers with the facts, as well as some critical and personal comments.

d.      Book Reviews

Book reviews should be up to 1500 words in length (standard book review) or up to 3000 words (critical book review). The standard book reviews detail the contribution and structure of the book and give a critical appraisal of its strengths and weaknesses. The critical book review essay, in addition to detailing the contribution and structure of the book, should also critically assess its arguments with a focus on key theoretical issues.

6.      Presentation Title

Every word in the title should be capitalised except for conjunctions (Headline Capitalisation). The title’s length should not exceed three lines after typeset (max. 150 characters including spaces). Subtitles are allowed and should also not exceed the 3 lines rule (max. 200 characters including spaces).

7.      Authors’ Details

Author(s) details should be included in a first asterisk footnote (*) inserted after the author’s/authors name(s).

Example: Article Title David Freestone ___ Prof David Freestone, Lobingier Visiting Professor of Comparative Law and Jurisprudence, George Washington University Law School. For correspondence: <dfreestone@law.gwu.edu>To do so: In the References ribbon tab, click the Footnotes launcher (lower right corner in the Footnotes section). There, place an asterisk into the Custom mark: box, then click Insert, and type your footnote text. All further footnotes should be numbered sequentially in superscript in the text outside punctuation marks.

8.      Tables and Figures

Tables and figures should be submitted on extra pages. Every table should have a title. The relevant sources of the data presented or of the tables or figures themselves should be indicated. Within the text, the position at which a table is to be included should be marked by ‘[TABLE …]’, the tables and figures being clearly numbered. Every table should be referred to. To ease the typesetting process, please keep formatting within tables to a minimum (e.g., avoid merged cells or the use of vertical text for headings).

9.      Abstract

All submissions, except country reports and book reviews, should be preceded by a short abstract (without heading) in italics of five to six sentences (approx. 200 words), without footnotes.

10. Heading

Every word in a heading should be capitalised except for conjunctions (Headline Capitalisation). The headings should be structured as follows:

H1: I. (starting with the introduction)

H2: 1.

H3: a.

H4: i.

V. Quotation and Referencing

All references should be included in the footnotes: no final bibliographies are allowed. The reference style is OSCOLA (4th edition), in brief: Quick Reference Guide. All contributions should be submitted in British English.

Until official guidance is released, authors should reference generative AI as personal communications for OSCOLA. Example of citation in footnotes:

ChatGPT 3 response to prompt to outline 3 implementation challenges of the Digital Markets Act (22 June 2023).

Submission – All pieces should be submitted in our house style in accordance with the Author Guidelines of the specific journal, available on their respective websites.

Authors guarantee that they have not submitted the (same or similar) manuscript elsewhere (including other publishing houses, online platforms etc) simultaneously, while waiting for the outcome of the review process. Authors who have submitted their manuscript for consideration to a Lexxion journal may publish a pre-peer review version of their work on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN). However, once the manuscript has been published in the journal, the authors have responsibility to remove the draft version from SSRN.

Disclaimer – Under no circumstances Lexxion Publisher can be held liable in respect of any material submitted and published, and cannot be held responsible for its content and accuracy by the contributing author. Nonetheless, we will, if notified and having satisfied ourselves of the bona fides of the notification, remove any content that might constitute a legal violation, such as material submitted in potential breach of copyright.

Copyright and Plagiarism – By submitting material for publication, the author guarantees that he or she is the original copyright holder of the work in question owning the legal rights to use the information. As such, Lexxion Publisher has no legal liability regarding any copyright claims, but will simply remove offending articles as/when we are advised of any breaches.

Review – All articles are subject to peer review in accordance with the Author Guidelines of the respective journal. A submission will be considered for publication in the next two issues after acceptance.  Longer processing may occur due to review processes or other factors determining the content of the issue such as the need to offer thematically balanced issues. The publication of any material submitted will be at the sole discretion of Lexxion Publisher.

Reservation of Rights – We reserve the right to accept, reject or remove any material submitted for publication with no explanation.

Offensive Content – Any material deemed defamatory, racist, or otherwise illegal or offending will in any case not be approved for publication.

Exclusive License for Publication and Copyright Transfer (Standard Publication) – By submitting materials, the author transfers all Copyrights of the work to Lexxion Publisher and grants us an exclusive, perpetual, royalty-free, worldwide license to publish any material the author submits to us in any format, including without limitation print and electronic formats. In particular, the author agrees that we can make it fully or partially available in the journal it was submitted to as well as in any other publications and/or media or social media of Lexxion Publisher, provided that due credit is given to the author.

Republication – Any form of republication by the author requires Lexxion Publisher’s prior approval. Nine months after the first publication, the author may discuss with the executive editor of the respective journal further publications of the published version of his or her contribution. If a contribution is republished, full reference should be made to its first appearance in the respective publication by Lexxion Publisher. If the digital version is republished, it must be guaranteed that the corresponding digital object index (DOI) is clearly stated. Republication as ‘self-archiving’ (such as in a personal or institutional website) are only allowed under the Open Access Publication policy described below.

Acknowledement – The author acknowledges that any breach of the abovementioned warranties may cause us damage or loss and the author agrees to indemnify us in full and permanently against any third party liabilities, claims, costs, loss or damage we incur as a result of publishing material the author submits to us, including consequential losses.

Archiving – Lexxion Publisher maintains secure electronic backups of all past issues of its journals since 2002. In the event the publication of a journal is discontinued, it shall make all possible efforts to keep contents available to readers online, or by request, in any way it deems appropriate. Lexxion Publisher ceases to be responsible for backups and archives of extant journals which have been acquired by other undertakings, except if otherwise agreed upon with said undertakings.

Fees and Open Access Publication – No fees are applied under the standard publication policy. Lexxion does offer authors the possibility to publish Open Access (OA). Under the OA publication policy: i) the final published article is made freely accessible to the public immediately upon publication, ii) authors retain the rights to republish their work, iii) authors, their institutions or funding bodies are obliged to pay an OA fee. The amount of the OA fee per contribution is equivalent to the campus license subscription fee for the respective journal. Contributions published under the OA policy must still successfully pass peer review in accordance with the journal’s Author Guidelines. If the contribution does not pass peer review, authors do not pay an OA fee. It is also possible for authors to opt for the OA policy at any future point after publication.

The need for clarity on agreed ethical standards for everyone involved in the publishing process (authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher) is a necessary publication prerequisite for all journals published by Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (the publisher).

This statement is meant to be a resource to rely on in case of doubt or dispute.

This Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, which is also the reference text if further clarifications and information are needed.

The preparation for the publication of a journal is the charge of its Editorial Team, usually comprised of the Editorial Board, Managing Editors or Editors-in-Chief and Executive Editors. Other Editors may be appointed as necessary.

Editorial Board members are recognised experts in their fields and include academics, legal professionals, scientists, government and EU officials, and other authorities.

1. General Duties of the Publisher
   • Journals are accountable for the content published, through their reviewing and checking processes. Therefore they also hold the responsibility for deciding which contributions should be published. This choice is made on the basis of the quality and novelty of the material, and of its integrity in order to meet the needs of readers and authors.
   • Lexxion supports equal rights and opportunities; therefore every article submitted is taken into consideration and evaluated for its content, without discrimination on any of the grounds set forth in Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
   • Journals published by Lexxion do not disclose information on their evaluation of an article to any of the parties involved in its preparation for publication. The same applies to unpublished material, unless with the specific consent of the authors.
   • The publisher commits to act promptly in case any published material requires corrections of significant import, retractions, clarifications and apologies, as appropriate to each case. Corrections shall be adopted only if they refer to facts or events prior to the submission of the final manuscript and substantially affect the work. Minor or cosmetic corrections, including typos, updates, revisions etc will not be allowed after publication.
2. General Duties of the Editors
   • The members of the Editorial Teams shall act in a professional, balanced, fair and objective manner in carrying out their duties to the journal, without discrimination on any of the grounds set forth in Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
   • This shall apply to all situations, but especially the treatment of authors and assessment of submissions for publication. These shall be considered solely on the basis of the quality of their content and the ethical standards set herein.
   • The Editorial Teams shall duly follow these ethical guidelines and act diligently in cases of suspected misconduct, adopting reasonable measures and procedures to deal with complaints and conflicts.
   • Editors shall refrain from involvement in any review or situation in which a conflict of interests may arise.
3. General Duties of the Reviewers
   • Reviewers shall follow this PEMS and our other specific guidelines and provide an unbiased, non-personal, and objective review of the contributions submitted to them. The reviews must be a tool for improving the quality of the papers, therefore any criticism by the reviewers must be supported by strong arguments, be as clear and specific as possible and remain respectful at all times.
   • Reviewers must treat any submitted manuscript confidentially, and must not use the content to their advantage, unless otherwise agreed upon in writing with the publisher, who shall consult authors beforehand.
   • When accepting the review of a contribution, reviewers shall commit to following all mutually-agreed-upon deadlines and not unduly delay or postpone the review. If unwilling or unable to finish a review, reviewers shall promptly notify the Editorial Team, and attempt to the best of their abilities to find a replacement.
   • Reviewers must immediately inform the Editorial Team of any actual or potential conflict of interests, including those arising after the initiation of their review. The Editorial Team shall act accordingly based on this information.
4. General Duties of the Authors
   • Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and provide or reference sufficient material to permit the check or replication of their work. If the work has more than one author, all of them must have significantly contributed to the research; conversely, all significant contributors shall be duly identified. If requested, authors shall clarify to the Editorial Team who was responsible for which part of the work.
   • Authors ensure the originality of their work and the proper citation of, reference or credit to the works of others present in their own, in terms of both specific quotation and general influence and guidance.
   • In accordance with Lexxion’s Terms and Conditions, authors shall not submit a contribution to multiple journals or publishers at the same time, nor shall they submit contributions already published (partially or as a whole), even if in another language.
   • Authors must verify and guarantee compliance with ethical standards in the treatment of participants (human or animal) and provide information about the procedures adopted in their studies. Any relevant financial support, direct involvement in a matter discussed in the work (such as judicial proceedings) or other relevant affiliations shall be clearly stated in the work.
   • In case an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work it is the author’s responsibility to immediately notify the publisher or the journal’s Editorial Team, who shall act promptly as appropriate. Authors shall remain available to make such corrections at the request of the publisher or Editorial Team.
   • Authors shall pledge to follow this PEMS and the Author Guidelines of the respective publication, making sure that their work adheres to them entirely before submission. Contributions that do not do so may be summarily rejected.
   • Authors are obliged to take part in the review process by remaining available for any changes, modifications, improvements etc as may be required by reviewers and Editorial Teams. These shall be considered as mandatory conditions for publication; authors shall strive to adopt them to the widest possible extent. Clear and objective justification shall be given by authors if any request hasn’t been met. Editorial Teams reserve the right to return any insufficiently modified contribution to authors for further work, or to reject its publication.
   • Authors shall undertake to follow all assigned deadlines strictly, without undue or unjustified delays. Any delay must be communicated to the Editorial Team prior to the original deadline; failure to do so may result in the summary rejection of a contribution.
   • Upon the first submission of a manuscript, authors must clearly inform the publisher of any prior commitments or obligations they are under which may affect the licensing of their work, including (but not limited to) obligations to make research freely available. Failure to do so may incur the sole liability of the author.
5. Publication Ethics
   • Under no circumstance shall Lexxion publish any work where research misconduct (including but not limited to plagiarism) has knowingly occurred, nor encourage or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. It shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of such works.
   • In the event such misconduct or allegations thereof are brought to the attention of the publisher or Editorial Team, by any person whatsoever, they shall deal with such information as appropriate to each case. The identity of the source shall be protected unless this is explicitly waivered by the same.
   • The case shall be treated discretely and confidentially as much as possible or required by the situation, and no information or allegation shall be made public until the end of the inquiry, and only if so required.
   • All persons involved or alleged to be involved shall be given ample opportunity to clarify the matter.
   • The Editorial Teams and the publisher shall strive to seek the most accurate information possible to guide any decision.
   • Without prejudice to other actions, the publisher shall promptly correct, retract, remove or otherwise remedy any work it published in which misconduct has occurred.
   • The publisher reserves the right to seek judicial remedies, inform or alert professional associations, ethics committees, funding bodies, employers etc, or to take any other action it deems appropriate according to the severity of the misconduct.
6. Peer-review
   All articles submitted to a Lexxion journal are peer-reviewed. Review processes vary per journal and are described in their respective Author Guidelines. The choice and assignment of reviewers is at the sole discretion of the Editorial Team; details thereof shall not be discussed or made public, and authors may not make any requests in this regard.