Submit a 2500 words essay on the topic The Treaty On The Functioning Of The European Union.It also explains article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union briefly. Two cases that relate to article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union have been selected for comparison in this paper. One case is related to pharmaceutical industry while other is related to the use of the internet. The cases have been selected from different sectors to present a better understanding of the course. The cases selected in the paper have been decided by the Commission and reached the European Courts and the decisions of the cases have been made by the respective courts. The cases selected are not very old or rather they are recent cases. The facts and decisions of both the cases are presented separately and the decisions of both the cases are analyzed considering their significance, the implications of the decision including academic and political opinion on the case. Formerly Article 101 and Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) were Article 1 and Article 82 of the EC Treaty respectively before the enforcement of the Lisbon Treaty in December 2009. Before the Lisbon treaty the General Court was also called the Court of First Instance (CFI). Background information relating to competition policy Competition is necessary for any market as it is the basic mechanism of any economy encouraging businesses to offer their products and services to consumers on favorable terms. It is also essential to improve efficiency, to encourage innovation and to reduce prices. The competition can only be effective if companies act independently under the competitive pressure which is exerted by other companies. According to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union there are two central rules which are the foundation of the European antitrust policy: First, the Article 101 of the Treaty prohibits any agreement between two or more independent companies which restricts competition. This provision of the Article 101 is applicable to both horizontal agreements (between competitors which operate at same level of the supply chain) and vertical agreements (between companies which operate at different levels, i.e. agreement between a producer and its dealer). There are only a few limited exceptions from the provisions of the Article 101. The most reprehensible example which infringes Article 101 is the introduction of a ‘cartel’ which an illegal conduct involving price-fixing or / and market sharing. Second, the Article 102 of the treaty prohibits companies from holding and abusing its dominant position on a particular market. The most infringing examples are by charging inappropriate prices, by reducing the amount of production, or by not innovating as per the prejudice of the customers (Cseres, 2010). The Treaty has empowered the Commission for applying these rules of prohibition and investigating the violations of the rules of prohibition. The commission is given a number of powers to investigate those ends by inspecting their premises, both business and non-business and writing for seeking information from them. It is also empowered for imposing penalties on businesses violating the antitrust rules of the European Union. The main rules and the procedures of applying the rules of Articles 101 and 102 of TEFU are described in Council Regulation (EC) 1/2003. The National Competition Authorities (NCA) were given authorities and powers to apply Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty in May 2004 so that the distortion or restriction of competition can be ensured. The Treaty also provides individual rights to citizen which are