scholarly journals PEMBATASAN TERHADAP PERSAINGAN UNTUK MEMBENTUK PASAR DALAM KASUS STANDARD ESSENTIAL PATENT (SEP) (PERBANDINGAN HUKUM PERSAINGAN USAHA DI INDONESIA DAN UNI EROPA)

Arena Hukum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-244
Author(s):  
Sih Wahyuningtyas
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Relevant Market ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Market Dominance ◽  
Essential Patent ◽  
Technology Industries ◽  
Standard Essential Patent

The role of patents is complex when dealing with the problem of technological interoperability in cases where patented technology becomes standard. In such cases, a balance is needed between the protection of the interests of the inventor, i.e. the standard essential patent (SEP) holder, and of users who need the technology to enter the market. There is a susceptibility to restrictions on competition to create markets (competition for the market). Market dominance can be created by the adoption of SEP holder technology as a standard and hence, a key for other business actors to enter the market. With the potential for the formation of a dominant position in the relevant market, the competition law intervention is required when patent abuse occurs, as it appears typical in the pharmaceutical and information technology industries. The normative research examines how competition law in the European Union deals with SEP cases in comparison to Indonesian competition law.

SEP Litigation and Huawei

2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 786-805 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rupprecht Podszun
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
European Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Essential Patent ◽  
Patent Thickets ◽  
Standard Essential Patent

In the 2015 case Huawei/ZTE, the Court of Justice of the European Union took one of its rare opportunities to rule on the interface of antitrust and patent law. The question before the Court was whether the holder of a standard-essential patent abuses a dominant position by seeking an injunction against a potential licensee. Regarding a previous line of cases under European law, the Court took a surprisingly easy solution by forcing the companies to get back to the negotiation table. This may be attributed to a new methodological balancing approach of the Court. While acknowledging the problem of patent thickets, the Court restrains the role of antitrust authorities in this field.

8. EU competition law: Article 102 TFEU

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
National Competition ◽  
Abusive Behaviour ◽  
Article 102 Tfeu

This chapter focuses on Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Article 102 prohibits, as incompatible with the internal market, any abuse by undertakings in a dominant position within the internal market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States. It should be noted at the outset that ‘dominance’ itself is not prohibited, but only when such dominance is accompanied with abusive behaviour that may affect trade. Like Article 101, Article 102 is enforced by the European Commission, national competition authorities, and national courts under powers conferred by Regulation 1/2003.

FRAND Defences Against the Grant of Injunctive Relief: Applying Huawei v ZTE in Singapore and China

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-60
Author(s):  
Joseph Lau
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Market Power ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Telecommunications Sector ◽  
Injunctive Relief ◽  
Standard Essential Patents

AbstractFrom the size of A4 paper to 5G in the telecommunications sector, standards are ubiquitous. Standard essential patents (SEPs), which protect technology essential to standards, enable their proprietors to gain significant market power. Antitrust authorities therefore scrutinize the exercise of SEPs for breaches of competition law. In this regard, the ability of SEP proprietors to obtain injunctions against implementers as a remedy for infringement of SEPs where licensing negotiations have broken down or are ‘ongoing’ has proven controversial. Some fear that this enables SEP proprietors to threaten injunctions unless implementers agree to unfair, unreasonable, or discriminatory terms. In Huawei Technologies Co Ltd v ZTE Corp [2015] ECLI:EU:C:2015:477, the Court of Justice of the European Union identified circumstances where a SEP proprietor's application for injunctive relief as a remedy for infringement of its SEP constitutes an abuse of a dominant position, with the classification of the SEP proprietor's application as being abusive forming a ‘FRAND Defence’ which implementers may invoke against the grant of the injunction requested. This article analyzes whether this approach can be replicated by the Singapore Courts and whether the Chinese Courts, which have already dealt with SEP licensing disputes, adopt a similar approach.

scholarly journals What Role for EU Competition Law in Regulated Industries? Reflections on the Judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2015 Orange Polska v European Commission (Case T-486/11)

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (14) ◽  
pp. 265-277
Author(s):  
Sandra Marco Colino
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Commission Decision ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Broadband Services ◽  
Regulated Industries ◽  
New Entrants

On 17th December 2015, the General Court of the European Union (GC) confirmed a fine of over EUR 127 million imposed by the European Commission (hereinafter the Commission) on the Polish telecommunications company Orange Polska (hereinafter OP), formerly known as Telekomunikacja Polska. According to the fining decision, issued in 2011 (hereinafter the Commission decision), OP abused its dominant position by refusing access to its wholesale broadband services to new entrants, acting in contravention of Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

scholarly journals Liberdade de Concorrência na União Europeia: Convergência da Doutrina e da Jurisprudência no Reconhecimento da Disciplina Concorrencial como base para o Mercado Interno

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Rinaldi de Barcellos
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Rio Grande ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Present Moment ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rio Grande Do Sul ◽  
Constant Improvement

LIBERDADE DE CONCORRÊNCIA NA UNIÃO EUROPEIA: CONVERGÊNCIA DA DOUTRINA E DA JURISPRUDÊNCIA NO RECONHECIMENTO DA DISCIPLINA CONCORRENCIAL COMO BASE PARA O MERCADO INTERNO  FREEDOM OF COMPETITION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: CONVERGENCE OF THE DOCTRINE AND THE CASE LAW IN THE RECOGNITION OF COMPETITION LAW AS A BASIS TO THE INTERNAL MARKET               Nicole Rinaldi de Barcellos* RESUMO: O objetivo deste estudo é investigar o papel da liberdade de concorrência no mercado interno da União Europeia, mediante análise doutrinária e jurisprudencial. A disciplina concorrencial compõe os instrumentos fundacionais do referido bloco econômico desde as primeiras versões até o presente momento, mantendo uma considerável estabilidade ao longo do tempo. A aplicação do direito da concorrência, por sua vez, encontra-se em constante aprimoramento, sendo objeto de discussão constante no âmbito do Tribunal de Luxemburgo, conforme os objetivos integracionistas são alargados, estimulando o desenvolvimento econômico equilibrado dos atores no mercado interno. Para desenvolver os objetivos propostos, a pesquisa foi dividida em duas partes. Na primeira seção são abordados os principais fundamentos teóricos da liberdade de concorrência no âmbito da União Europeia. Na segunda parte são apresentados casos jurisprudenciais considerados relevantes na consolidação da liberdade de concorrência como base ao mercado interno. Por fim, é destacada a essencialidade da liberdade concorrencial no processo de integração da União Europeia ao garantir e amparar as demais liberdades econômicas. PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Direito Internacional da Concorrência. União Europeia. Liberdade de Concorrência. Mercado Interno. Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia. ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to investigate the role of freedom of competition in the European Union internal market based on doctrinal and case law analysis. Competition law composes the founding instruments of the European Union since its first versions to the present moment, maintaining a considerable stability over time. Application of competition law, however, is in constant improvement by the Luxembourg Court as integrationist goals are extended, in order to stimulate balanced economic development to the actors in the internal market. To develop the proposed objectives, the research is divided into two parts. The first section examines the main theoretical foundations of the freedom of competition within the European Union. In the second part it is presented a case law summary, considered relevant to the consolidation of the subject. Ultimately, it is highlighted that freedom of competition is substantial to the European Union process of integration by ensuring and supporting the other essential economic freedoms.  KEYWORDS: International Competition Law. European Union. Freedom of Competition.  Internal Market. Court of Justice of the European Union. SUMÁRIO: Introdução. 1 Fundamentos doutrinários da liberdade de concorrência no ordenamento jurídico da União Europeia. 1.1 Características estruturais da liberdade de concorrência na União Europeia. 1.2 Domínio de Aplicação da Liberdade Concorrencial na União Europeia. 2 Contribuição da jurisprudência do Tribunal de Luxemburgo para a consolidação da liberdade de concorrência. 2.1 Caso Dióxido de Titânio como marco jurisprudencial (C-300/89). 2.2 Casos TeliaSonera (C-52/09) e Comissão c. Italia (C-496/09). Considerações finais. Referências.* Mestranda no Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito na Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), na linha de pesquisa Fundamentos da Integração Jurídica. Bolsista da CAPES/UFRGS. Especialista em Direito Internacional Público e Privado, e Direito da Integração pela Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS). Graduada pela Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS).

14 References

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brealey Mark ◽  
George Kyla
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Reference Procedure ◽  
Court Of Justice

This chapter examines the key legal issues arising from the preliminary reference procedure in competition law. It first considers references to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), focusing on Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) giving the Court jurisdiction to render preliminary rulings concerning the interpretation of the Treaty, and the validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions, bodies, offices, or agencies of the European Union. It then explains the role of a ‘court or tribunal’ in making a reference, as well as the issue of inadmissible references and mandatory references. Finally, it discusses the preliminary reference procedure, including the procedure before the referring court, and the order for reference, special requests, interventions, submission of written and oral observations, and the effect of a ruling.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document