scholarly journals Penerapan Pendekatan Rule Of Reason Oleh Kppu Dalam Dugaan Pengenaan Harga Eksesif (Studi Kasus Putusan KPPU Nomor Perkara 03/Kppu-I/2017)

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Indra Sanjaya
Keyword(s):  
Market Power ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
The Public ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Case Number

To assess whether a particular action of a business actor violates the provisions in Statute Number 5 of 1999, the KPPU and the Court may apply the per se illegal approach or rule of reason, depending on the formulation of the provisions allegedly violated. The rule of reason approach is an approach used by business competition authorities to make an evaluation of the consequences of certain agreements or business activities, to determine whether an agreement or activity is inhibiting or supporting competition. This paper analyzes the rule of reason approach applied by KPPU in cases with Case Number 03 / KPPU-I / 2017 to determine whether PT. Angkasa Pura II (Persero) which does not reduce the cost of shipping and taking cargo at Kualanamu Airport, even though its workload has been reduced, can be classified as a form of monopolization and constitutes a violation of the provisions of Article 17 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of Statute Number 5 of 1999. The results of the study showed that the application of the rule of reason by KPPU was carried out through 4 (four) steps, namely: (1). Market identification; (2) Identification of market power; (3) Identification of abuse of dominant position; (4) Identification of impacts on the public interest. Through the application of the rule of reason, KPPU decides that the actions of PT. Angkasa Pura II is a form of monopolization and that the action fulfills the elements in Article 17 paragraph (1) and (2) of Statute Number 5 of 1999.

scholarly journals Applying the rule of per se and rule of reason to assess the violation of the Competition Law by the IPRs owners

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. First
Author(s):  
Bui Thi-Hang Nga
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Competitive Advantage ◽  
Market Power ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The Right ◽  
Exclusive Right ◽  
Monopoly Position

With the nature of practically irreplaceable and the monopoly of the protection documents, the law has given the intellectual property rights (IPRs) owner a competitive advantage, as well as a market power. As a result, to extent the market power and create a monopoly position to maximize profitability, IPRs owners tend to abuse IPRs to limit competition. Although the exclusive right to IPRs is a legal monopoly comes from protection documents, it does not mean that the owner has the right to abuse this monopoly to limit competition. This is because such behavior is not considered an exception under the Competition Law and shall be prohibited in case the satisfaction of provision violating conditions of the Competition Law. However, in order to balance the interests of related subjects, in assessment of the Competition Law violations of IPRs abuses, the laws of countries fully recognized and applied the rule of reason instead of per ser as Competition Law violations in general. The article aims to analyze and explain the purpose of the application of the rule of reason when assessing the violation of the Competition Law of IPRs owner and when using the per se, in respect of the legal monopoly of the IPRs subjects. The paper then provides proposals to complete the Vietnamese Competition Law which governs the abuse of IPRs owners.

Should rangeland rehabilitation be paid for from the public purse?

1990 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 61 ◽  
Author(s):  
RK Lindner
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Market Failure ◽  
Policy Issue ◽  
Stocking Rate ◽  
Existence Value ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Purse ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Do So

The issue addressed in this paper is the appropriate source of funding for rangeland rehabilitation. Two subsidmy questions are pertinent to this policy issue. Is it profitable for private managers of pastoral properties to rehabilitate rangeland? If not, then on what grounds might it be in the public interest to do so? Evidence is presented that it is privately profitable to rehabilitate slightly to moderately degraded range, by destocking during seasons when there are good prospects for seedlings to become established, but otherwise matching the stocking rate to feed availability. Conversely, it is unprofitable to rehabilitate severely degraded range unless the cost of reseeding is subsidized by at least $5/ha. The relevance of various market failure arguments to the case for public fun- of rangeland rehabilitation to the extent of $100million is discussed, and the need to estimate the existence value of rangelands vis a vis other conservation goals is identified.

External Defences

2020 ◽  
pp. 301-349
Author(s):  
Stavroula Karapapa
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Business Models ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Online Services ◽  
Internet Service ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
The Public ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position ◽  
Legal Grounds

Some defences are available on grounds that are extraneous to copyright and are based either on other bodies of law, such as competition law or e-commerce protection, or on general legal principles. These include, for instance, defences available to Internet service providers for infringements carried out by their users, including defences for hosting, caching, and ‘mere conduit’. Others are available on the grounds of competition law, such as refusal to license or abuse of dominant position, which could have a legal basis of application—inter alia—in certain mass digital activities of online services. Other available defences fall under general legal principles that can be invoked in cases where copyright exceptions do not cover an activity for which there is a principle-based justification for the particular conduct. Such a justification could be the public interest or the doctrine of the ‘abuse of right’. There are also a number of uses that can be permitted on grounds of benign infringement on the basis of the ‘innocuous use’ doctrine. Unlike other defences to copyright, these defensive rules represent instances where copyright may be subject to limitations as a result of its encounter with other legal orders. Such instances have either not been institutionalized within copyright law, such as speech entitlements or public policy privileges, or may have been partially included within it while offering principle-based explanations for acts of copyright infringement on the basis of legal grounds found in other areas of law or broader legal principles. These defences are an essential component to the understanding of the scope of permissible copyright use on the Internet as they can be extremely relevant in cases which involve online services and business models, such as hosting services, and online content use more broadly.

Lawyers, Clients, and Professional Regulation

1976 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 917-1019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric H. Steele ◽  
Raymond T. Nimmer
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Services ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Professional Regulation ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Public Opinion Polls ◽  
Opinion Polls

The legal profession is currently the subject of controversy and criticism. Individual attorneys are often described as unethical and incompetent, while the bar is portrayed as politically partisan, captive of economic interests, and unresponsive to the public interest. Public opinion polls document disrespect for attorneys as a group. Local and national scandals highlight criminal acts of prominent attorneys. The cost, quality, and availability of legal services are matters of public debate.

scholarly journals Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Hadhonah Bagi Pasangan Yang Bercerai Di Pengadilan Agama Curup Tahun 2016

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zainal Arifin
Keyword(s):  
Field Research ◽  
Qualitative Approach ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Class I ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Religious Courts ◽  
Case Number

This research aims to give a identification about Hadhanah’s problems which were often separated with claims or divorce requests. The phenomenon of child custudy disputes for small regional areas such as in city of Curup is not understood yet by the public. The lack of understanding about it sometimes makes what has been decided by the court is not implemented by the parties concerned. This research was field research with qualitative approach. In assessing the primasy data obtained from the interview, the researcher used interative libraries such as the Alquran and hadith. From the research, it is found that, first the number of hadhanah’s case at Curupreligious court class I B in 2016 is one case with the case number 262/Pdt.G/2016/PA.Crp. Second, the exsecution of hadhanah’s case at curupreligious courts in class I B in 2016 has never been done because the public understanding of the execution is still lack, the cost of execution is quite expensive and the strength of family principles in solving problems. Last, the consistency of the level of execution ofhadhanah’s caseinCurup religious courts in class I B in 2016 can not be seen and can not be found. It is because there has never been any parties who have filed an appeal or a request for a cassation against hadhanah’s verdict.

Management of risk in the public interest

1991 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 446-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. C. Lind ◽  
J. S. Nathwani ◽  
E. Siddall
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Good Health ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Life Expectancy At Birth ◽  
Limited Life ◽  
Life Saving ◽  
Program Policy ◽  
The Cost

There is no Canadian policy for the management of health and safety in the public interest. Both lives and resources are lost as a result. Limited life-saving resources ought to be spent efficiently in the public interest. If the life expectancy at birth is the measure of safety overall, then account must be given of the efficiency of any safety program, policy, project, or regulation in terms of the years of life in good health saved and the cost incurred. A comparison is made of 26 programs implemented in the United States, and it is shown that they collectively waste several thousand lives per year; 95 cents on the dollar is wasted. An absolute upper cost limit is established, which no life-saving program can exceed without consuming more human time than it returns. Some elements of a rational safety policy, and some concrete steps that ought to be taken now towards its implementation, are suggested. Key words: risk, management, public interest, health, safety, life, human development, index, efficiency, ethics, profession, accountability.

Contemporary China Studies in Scandinavia

1996 ◽  
Vol 147 ◽  
pp. 938-961 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kjeld Erik Brodsgaard
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Contemporary China ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Historical Phonology ◽  
The Public ◽  
Chinese Studies ◽  
Classical Studies ◽  
China Studies ◽  
And Linguistics

Thirty years ago contemporary China studies in Scandinavia was largely an unknown phenomenon. Most sinologists worked on aspects of traditional sinology such as historical phonology, classical religion, philosophy and linguistics, and contemporary studies were seen as a rather shallow preoccupation which could be left safely in the hands of journalists and diplomats. However, as the public interest in contemporary China studies in Scandinavia grew and as development economists, political scientists and sociologists began to encroach on the China field, it increasingly became difficult to limit Chinese studies to classical pursuits. Today the contemporary China field in Scandinavia has grown strong and active and consists of approximately 90 active scholars. In most Scandinavian institutes classical studies occupy a dominant position in terms of faculty staff, but new positions are increasingly established within the contemporary field, where one also finds the majority of new Ph.D. projects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document