What is an anticompetitive effect?

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Policy Recommendation on Competitive Issues of PSI Re-use First draft … and beyond … Warsaw, October 20 th, 2011.
Advertisements

IMPACT ESTIMATION PROJECT h o r i z o n s c a n n i n g Anti-trust issues in on-line retailing Ed Smith Director Office of Fair Trading The views expressed.
Price Squeezes after Trinko Aryeh Friedman. United States v. Aluminum Co. of America (1945) Judge Hand held that Alcoa, a vertically integrated company.
Le présent support ne peut être reproduit sans autorisation 1 Legal case « Pierre Fabre Laboratories»  Is it legal to require the permanent presence of.
IMPACT ESTIMATION PROJECT h o r i z o n s c a n n i n g Observations on retail-MFNs and RPM Nelson Jung Director, Mergers Office of Fair Trading The views.
Trade Associations and EU Competition Law Alan S. Reid Lecturer in Law Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
The Eighth Annual Trans- Atlantic Antitrust Dialogue Exclusionary Pricing in Article 82 Cases – A U.S. FTC Perspective Alden F. Abbott Associate Director,
IP rights and competition law: Friends or foes? Etienne Wéry Attorney at the bars of Paris and Brussels Lecturer at Robert Schuman University (Strasbourg)
EU Competition Policy. Internal Market One of the activities of the Community: “an internal market characterised by the abolition, as between member States,
The BT Margin Squeeze Case Paolo Palmigiano Head of Competition Law BT Retail London, 10 December 2004.
Margin Squeeze in EC Competition Law LUISS, Rome, 19 April 2005 Damien Geradin University of Liège and College of Europe, Bruges.
Administration in International Organizations PUBLIC COMPETITION LAW Class I, 6th Oct 2014 Krzysztof Rokita.
Dominance – the lost child? Do effects-based rules mean the end of dominance analysis? BICCL Reform of Article February 2006 Thomas Eilmansberger,
1 REFORM OF ARTICLE 82 EC BIICL, 24 February 2006 Treatment of Rebates Johanne Peyre.
9 Import Tariffs and Quotas under Imperfect Competition 1
Administration in International Organizations PUBLIC COMPETITION LAW Class V, 3rd Nov 2014 Krzysztof Rokita.
1 Is there a conflict between competition law and intellectual property rights? Edward Whitehorn Head, Competition Affairs Branch Carrie Tang Assistant.
Prohibited agreements: Article 101 (3) Julija Jerneva ( )
World-class legal education in the heart of London The Competition Protocol: Undermining EU Competition Law? Wednesday April 28 th 2010,
Competition law – short overview. Which of the following is NOT an objective of EC competition policy? Preventing large undertakings from abusing their.
The Eighth Annual Trans-Atlantic Antitrust Dialogue Exclusionary pricing in Article 82 cases – recent case-law of the Community Courts 15 May 2008 Kyriakos.
Post Danmark: a big step towards a consistent application of a consumer oriented effects-based approach to exclusionary pricing practices Luc Peeperkorn*
6 th Annual Conference Moscow, 30 May Unilateral Conduct Working Group Case Study in the Assessment of Dominance British Airways plc v. Commission.
London 22 Nov 2005 Modernization of Article 82 Lars-Hendrik Röller * Chief Competition Economist European Commission CLA and BIICL Conference on Article.
Administration in International Organizations PUBLIC COMPETITION LAW Class IV, 27th Oct 2014 Krzysztof Rokita.
Agreement on Anti-Dumping Measures Anti - Dumping Importers would like to import goods if available at a price lower than that of the good in the importing.
The EU Microsoft case: refusal to supply Nicholas Banasevic DG Competition, European Commission (speaking in a personal capacity - the views expressed.
Chapter 11 Pushing Exports.
Introductory course on Competition and Regulation Pál Belényesi University of Verona October 2006.
Abuse of Dominance Alice Pham 31 October Content 1.Introduction 2.Definition of relevant markets 3.Analysis of market power 4.Abusive practices.
From « Guidelines on the applicability of Article 81 of the EC Treaty to horizontal cooperation Agreements » The purpose of these guidelines is to provide.
Conglomerate Merger Control After Tetra Laval Sven B. Völcker 29 April 2005.
Can a Competition Law Violation be Legally Insignificant? A U.S. Perspective Russell W. Damtoft Associate Director Office of International Affairs United.
Economics RBB 26 JANUARY 2007SIMON BISHOP THE LAW AND ECONOMICS OF LOYALTY REBATES CENTRE FOR COMPETITION LAW AND POLICY, OXFORD UNIVERSITY.
How to assess vertical mergers cast your vote! Miguel de la Mano* Member of the Chief Economist Team DG COMP, European Commission *The views expressed.
1 Remedies under Article 82 EC Per Hellström DG Competition, European Commission (speaking in a personal capacity - the views expressed are not necessarily.
Trends in Retail Competition: Private Labels, Brands and Competition Policy A Symposium on the Role of Private Labels in Competition between Retailers.
UNCTAD The interface between competition policy, trade, investment and development Geneva, 23 July 2007 Abuse of Market Power Presentation by: Ursula Ferrari.
1 Federal Network Agency for Electricity, Gas, Telecommunications, Post and Railways Michael Schimmel Price squeeze tests in electronic communications.
Antitrust Law 1. Learning Objectives: 1.The three major pieces of federal antitrust legislation 2.Monopoly power vs. monopolization 3.Horizontal vs. Vertical.
© DET JURIDISKE FAKULTET UNIVERSITETET I OSLO “object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition” The term “prevention, restriction.
Post Danmark II in context
The dominance concept: new wine in old bottles Miguel de la Mano * Member of the Chief Economist’s Office DG COMP, European Commission FTC/DOJ Hearings.
ABA China Inside and Out September , Beijing The interface between competition law and intellectual property Nicholas Banasevic, DG Competition,
Use and limits of market definition 11 November 2015 St. Martin’s conference, Brno Alexis Walckiers Belgian Competition Authority and ECARES-Université.
© Hogan & Hartson LLP. All rights reserved. Monopoly Power: Getting it and keeping it US Perspective Sharis Pozen, Partner ACCE Seminar 13 May 2008.
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION Guidance on the Commission's Enforcement Priorities in Applying Article 82 EC Treaty to Abusive Exclusionary Conduct.
Marketing I Curriculum Guide. Pricing Standard 4.
“object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition” The term “prevention, restriction and distortion” – Used interchangeably Economic.
EU Business Law: Anticompetitive agreements (Art. 101 TFEU) Dr. Agata Jurkowska-Gomułka.
Exercise of IP rights as an abusive behaviour under EU antitrust law Christian Vollrath European Commission DG Competition 1.
Dace Berkolde Director State Aid Control Department Ministry of Finance Latvia 1.
Abuse of dominant position European Business Law 2013/2014 University of Warsaw Faculty of Management Dariusz Aziewicz LL.M.
Quantity Rebates After Post Danmark II Nicholas Khan Legal Adviser Legal Service of the European Commission 17 March 2015.
A ‘back to basics’ approach to online markets Pablo Ibáñez Colomo London School of Economics 18 April 2016.
The EU Commission’s Guidance Paper on Art 102 Concurrences with Shearman & Sterling Oxera Pascale Déchamps Partner 22 June 2016.
competition rules in inland transport
European Union Law Week 10.
EU Competition Rules for Technology Transfer Agreements
Chapter 37 Antitrust Law.
 The term “prevention, restriction and distortion” Used interchangeably
Lear - Laboratorio di economia, antitrust, regolamentazione
3 Analyzing a Company’s External Environment Chapter
African Competition Forum
Intel: Back to the Future?
LIDC Prague, 12 October 2012 EU competition law and end-of-lifecycle pharmaceutical products Blaž Višnar DG Competition DISCLAIMER “The views expressed.
Intel and the future of Article 102 TFEU
EU Competition Policy Article 101 TFEU.
Internal (single) market
Academic Year Prof. Pietro Boria
Presentation transcript:

What is an anticompetitive effect? Pablo Ibáñez Colomo London School of Economics and College of Europe http://chillingcompetition.com

What is it, though?

Competitive disadvantage Consumer welfare

‘26. In order to establish whether the price discrimination on the part of an undertaking in a dominant position vis-à-vis its trade partners tends to distort competition on the downstream market, as the Advocate General submitted, in essence, in paragraph 63 of his Opinion, the mere presence of an immediate disadvantage affecting operators who were charged more, compared with the tariffs applied to their competitors for an equivalent service, does not, however, mean that competition is distorted or is capable of being distorted’. Case C‑525/16, MEO

Anticompetitive effect ≠ Competitive disadvantage

‘250. With regard to the third part of the second ground of appeal, it must be held at the outset that, in paragraphs 234 to 244 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court correctly rejected the Commission’s arguments to the effect that the very existence of a pricing practice of a dominant undertaking which leads to the margin squeeze of its equally efficient competitors constitutes an abuse within the meaning of Article [102 TFEU], and that it is not necessary for an anti-competitive effect to be demonstrated’. Case C-280/08, Deutsche Telekom

‘38. Indeed, to the extent that a dominant undertaking sets its prices at a level covering the great bulk of the costs attributable to the supply of the goods or services in question, it will, as a general rule, be possible for a competitor as efficient as that undertaking to compete with those prices without suffering losses that are unsustainable in the long term’. Case C-209/10, Post Danmark I

‘39. It is for the court making the reference to assess the relevant circumstances of the case in the main proceedings in the light of the finding made in the previous paragraph. In any event, it is worth noting that it appears from the documents before the Court that Forbruger- Kontakt managed to maintain its distribution network despite losing the volume of mail related to the three customers involved and managed, in 2007, to win back the Coop group’s custom and, since then, that of the Spar group’. Case C-209/10, Post Danmark I

Anticompetitive effect ≠ Anything that makes competitors’ life more difficult

Anticompetitive effect = Impact on rivals’ ability and incentive to compete

’73. It follows that fixing an appreciability (de minimis) threshold for the purposes of determining whether there is an abuse of a dominant position is not justified. That anticompetitive practice is, by its very nature, liable to give rise to not insignificant restrictions of competition, or even of eliminating competition on the market on which the undertaking concerned operates’. Case C-23/14, Post Danmark II

Anticompetitive effect ≠ Appreciability of the effect