scholarly journals Towards the Effects-based Approach in EU Competition Law: the Assessment of Single Branding Agreements

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang-Chiang Hsieh
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Barriers To Entry ◽  
Exclusive Dealing ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Relevant Factors ◽  
The Eu

This article compares the economic assessments conducted by judicial practice on single branding/exclusive dealing cases between the EU and the U.S. in order to gain insights on how to improve the effects-based approach to competition law. Generally speaking, the U.S. judicial practice presented a more integrated approach to examine the practical effects caused by exclusive dealing arrangements than its EU as well as Taiwanese counterpart. The U.S. cases Tampa and Standard Stations laid down the requirement to weigh the anti-competitive effect with all relevant factors taken into account. More recent cases exemplified the incorporation of the theory of Raising Rivals’ Cost (RRC) into assessment of contested conducts, which enriched the analysis of the practical effects on barriers to entry.In contrast, the EU case law has still been taking a more formalistic approach. Though it is widely acknowledged that analysis of effects on restriction of competition is required as to single branding agreements under Art. 101 TFEU, Delimitis as the leading case failed to clarify the economic logic behind and the economic relationship between the factors required to be examined. The application of Art. 102 TFEU before Intel is close to a per se standard. However, the turn of Van den Bergh and Intel to more consideration of the effect on cost of existing or potential competitors deserves more observation as to future developments. It is argued that the U.S. practice can shed light on EU competition law in two perspectives. Firstly, the test of Delimitis needs to be restructured to examine and weigh the effect of the contested agreements. Secondly, the approach for Art. 102 TFEU could be developed through adoption of similar tests with those conducted in application of Art. 101 TFEU, where assessment of barriers to entry is crucial.

scholarly journals Marketplaces Restrictions and Selective Distribution after Coty Germany

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (18) ◽  
pp. 241-284
Author(s):  
Patrycja Szot ◽  
Ana Amza
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Luxury Good ◽  
Luxury Goods ◽  
Selective Distribution ◽  
Price Comparison ◽  
Online Platforms ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Key Points ◽  
The Eu

This article discusses the framework of selective distribution agreements within EU competition law following the Coty Germany case and the EU Commission’s 2017 E-commerce report. It argues that the judgment removed, in essence, the limitation of sales via online platforms from the ‘by object box’. In respect of luxury goods, the ban is considered not to infringe competition law at all. In this context, the article addresses one of the judgment’s key points: what constitutes a ‘luxury good’ and evaluates to what an extent this definition can be practically applied. The authors also embark on the conditions under which the restriction is considered proportionate (when applied to non-luxury goods) and point to the risk of divergent interpretations of platform bans across member states. To illustrate the latter, several examples are given from national case-law. The considerations are completed with a brief look at problematic restrictions on the use of price comparison tools.

The role of ‘freedom’ in EU competition law

Legal Studies ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pınar Akman
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Competition Policy ◽  
Economic Freedom ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Initial Reading ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Comprehensive Study

An initial reading of EU competition law jurisprudence and literature may suggest that there might be a competition-related freedom in the EU, expressed along the lines of ‘freedom of competition’ or ‘freedom to compete’. If competition is to be protected as a ‘freedom’ rather than merely as a ‘policy’, what this freedom involves should be established. It is important to establish the role of ‘freedom’, since it has been argued that EU competition law is a product of or has been significantly influenced by ‘ordoliberalism’. Under ordoliberalism, protecting the ‘economic freedom’ of market actors is the aim of competition policy. This paper examines the entire jurisprudence of the EU Courts to establish the role of ‘freedom’ in EU competition law as perceived by the EU Courts. This inquiry establishes whether ordoliberalism has so fundamentally influenced the jurisprudence that welfare-based objectives cannot be adopted as an/the objective of EU competition law. This is the first such comprehensive study regarding ‘freedom’ in EU competition law. The paper demonstrates that there is little quantitative or qualitative support for the ordoliberal argument when one considers the relevant jurisprudence. A quantitative analysis of the case-law and in particular the historical trend raises serious doubts concerning the validity of the conventional ordoliberal-influence thesis.

THE EFFECTS OF BROADCASTING DIGITIZATION ON EU COMPETITION LAW: A TALE OF EU COPYRIGHT POLICIES

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Konstantina Bania
Keyword(s):  
Market Integration ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Single Market ◽  
Market Strategy ◽  
Digital Copyright ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Union Competition ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Competition Enforcement

ABSTRACT In recent years, buzz terms such as “geo-blocking”, “online content portability”, and “digital copyright” have been making rounds in EU policy circles. This is largely attributed to the “Digital Single Market Strategy”, an ambitious reform the objective of which is to ensure seamless cross-border access to online services. Pursuit of this objective appears to be largely driven by the assumption that limiting the exclusivity of copyright would stimulate intra-Union competition in content markets. Against the background of EU competence limitations in the field of copyright and the increasing popularity of global U.S. firms in European audiovisual markets, this paper argues that EU Competition Law has vainly been instrumentalized to complete a single market for content. More particularly, based on legal and policy developments, which appear to challenge widespread licensing practices, sector-specific economics, and the case law that sets the conditions under which competition enforcement may introduce limits to copyright protection, this study develops the following twofold argument: in an attempt to create a single market for copyright-protected broadcast content, the EU has stretched the boundaries of competition law in an excessive manner and such unjustified interference with copyright is simply inadequate to promote competition and market integration.

Competition Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Whish ◽  
David Bailey
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Business Practices ◽  
Periodical Literature ◽  
Digital Platforms ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
First Time ◽  
The Eu

Competition Law explains competition law and policy in the EU and UK. The intention is to provide the reader with an understanding of competition law and policy, to introduce the reader to key economic concepts, legal principles and tools in competition law, and to provide insights into the numerous different issues that arise when applying competition law to market behaviour. Describing the economic rationale for the law, the chapters consider the application of EU and UK competition law to various business practices, including cartels, cooperation agreements, distribution agreements, licences of intellectual property rights, joint ventures, and mergers. The text has been updated to include the changes to UK law as a consequence of Brexit. It discusses for the first time the rise of powerful digital platforms and the quest for a suitable competition law and regulatory response to this phenomenon. It also considers the implications of the European Green Deal and the sustainability agenda for EU competition law and practice. The text incorporates extensive new legislation, case-law, decisional practice, guidelines and periodical literature at EU and UK level.

Anticompetitive Effects in EU Competition Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Ibáñez Colomo
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Time Variable ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Competitive Disadvantage ◽  
Probability Threshold ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Freedom Of Action

Abstract This article examines the meaning and scope of the notion of anticompetitive effects in EU competition law. It does so by bringing together several strands of the case law (and this across all provisions, namely Articles 101 and 102 TFEU and merger control). The analysis is structured around a framework that considers the main variables that shape the notion in practice: the time variable (actual or potential effects); the dimensions of competition and the counterfactual; the meaning of effects and the probability threshold (plausibility, likelihood, certainty). The exercise shows that it is possible to discern a concrete meaning to the notion of anticompetitive effects. Some central questions, including the role and operation of the counterfactual and the threshold of effects, have already been answered by the Court of Justice. In particular, it has long been clear that anticompetitive effects amount to more than a mere competitive disadvantage and/or a limitation of a firm’s freedom of action. The impact on equally efficient firms’ ability and/or incentive to compete would need to be established. At the same time, some open questions and some potential areas of friction (relating, inter alia, to stakeholders’ tendency to conflate appreciability and effects) remain. These are also discussed.

Concentrations in the Aviation Sector: How to maintain the level playing field for airlines and airports?

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 485-511
Author(s):  
Valentine Lemonnier
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Air Transport ◽  
Transport Sector ◽  
Level Playing Field ◽  
Playing Field ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Free Competition ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Eu

Before the Covid-19 pandemic hit, the scheduled passenger air transport sector was already subject to several horizontal concentrations. The mix of free competition and strict regularization in the air transport sector in the EU raises the question whether the current framework will still be able to provide a level playing field to the market participants, notably airlines and airports. The study focusses on how EU competition law has influenced horizontal concentrations (i.e. mergers and horizontal co-operations) in the scheduled passenger air transport sector. The results of the discussion are the basis for a reflection of the effects of different types of horizontal concentrations on the negotiation power of airlines vis-à-vis airports. A third focus of the study is the identification of regulatory weaknesses with regard to airport financing under the Airport Charges Directive (Directive 2009/12/EC), how those weaknesses benefit airlines and how they might interfere with efforts made under the application of competition law.

scholarly journals A Note on 2015 Developments in Polish Competition Law: Is it Really a Drive Towards the European Model?

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (14) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Piszcz
Keyword(s):  
Competition Law ◽  
Considerable Part ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Model ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Conscious Intention ◽  
Further Development ◽  
The Eu

Modern Polish competition law has become highly regulated and codified over the twenty five years of its existence and this article will provide readers with information relating to its recent developments of 2015. Separate subsections present a review of provisions on remedies in infringement decisions as well as settlements. A considerable part of this paper is designed to outline the peculiarities that characterize Poland’s new provisions on fines. Further on, the paper introduces readers to newest trends in the area of concentration control between undertakings. In addition, an assessment of recent developments and suggestions for a further development of Polish competition law are reviewed in the EU context. The conscious intention of the author is to analyse whether the EU competition law pattern, often regarded as a model for Member States, has been used to develop Polish competition law. Has the latter been amended to look more, or less like EU competition law? Has Polish competition law shown the capacity to absorb the best elements of EU competition law into itself? How is the outcome aligned with the declared direction of these amendments?

scholarly journals Distribution of new cars – no longer an issue for EU competition law?

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 371-383
Author(s):  
Václav Šmejkal
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
National Level ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Automotive Sector ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Competition Law ◽  
Car Sales ◽  
Year 2000 ◽  
Block Exemption ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Distribution cartels in the automotive sector used to be frequently dismantled and sanctioned by the European Commission and the EU Courts still some 15 years ago. In recent years, however, only a few cases have been reported at the national level of EU Member States. Is it because the distribution of new cars really ceased to be a competition problem as the European Commission declared when it removed this part of the automotive business from the specific Block Exemption Regulation for the automotive sector in 2010? The purpose of the present analysis is first to inspect the car distribution cases that emerged in the EU after the year 2000 and, second, to speculate somewhat whether new forms of distribution, brought by the digitalization of marketing and sales, cannot bring about also new risks to cartel agreements and other types of distortions of competition in car sales.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document