Review of judicial cases involving the competition authority

2021 ◽  
pp. 102-106
Author(s):  
L. V. Vovkivskaya ◽  
E. V. Savostina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Foreign Investor ◽  
Competition Authority ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

Analysis of the legal positions of arbitration courts in cases of violation of antitrust laws in terms of consideration of issues: exceptions to the patent monopoly, approaches to proving anticompetitive agreements, establishing the fact of being under the control of a foreign investor, abuse of dominant position, bringing to administrative responsibility in the absence of representatives of the person involved. Target: developing uniform approaches in law enforcement practice in cases of violation of antitrust laws.

scholarly journals Legal means of antimonopoly regulation of entrepreneurial activity. Responsibility for violation of antitrust laws.

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 41-45
Author(s):  
Vladislav Belyay
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Entrepreneurial Activity ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The aim of this legal research is to analyze the legal means of antimonopoly regulation of entrepreneurial activity. In the course of the study, it was possible to find a number of problems in the use of legal means of antimonopoly regulation of entrepreneurial activity, as well as in the area of bringing to administrative responsibility for violation of antimonopoly legislation. To solve the above problems, the author suggests: 1. For a more effective fight against the abuse of a dominant position, it is necessary to apply tools of risk-oriented control 2. Create a mechanism for coordinating the actions of law enforcement agencies and antimonopoly authorities to identify the most dangerous offenses in the field of antimonopoly regulation. 3. Create a separate procedure for legal regulation of bringing to administrative responsibility for violation of antimonopoly legislation, separating these norms from the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation into the current law on the protection of competition.

scholarly journals Analytical review of antitrust judicial practice (second half of 2019)

2019 ◽  
pp. 74-77
Author(s):  
L. V. Vovkivskaya ◽  
E. V. Savostina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Analytical Review ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The review contains an analysis of the legal positions of the arbitration courts of the Russian Federation in cases of violation of the antimonopoly legislation regarding the consideration of the following issues: the primacy of antimonopoly control in relation to entities holding a dominant position; creation by the customer of unequal conditions for the participation of persons in procurement; inaction of the authority, leading to restriction of competition; creating benefits for a particular business entity during the procurement; repetition when brought to administrative responsibility. The purpose of the analytical review is the formation of uniform approaches in law enforcement practice in cases of violation of antitrust laws.

Review of Judicial Cases Involving the Competition Authority

2021 ◽  
pp. 88-91
Author(s):  
L. V. Vovkivskaya ◽  
E. V. Savostina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Competition Authority ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Economic Entity ◽  
Antitrust Laws

Analysis of the legal positions of arbitration courts in cases of violation of antimonopoly laws in terms of consideration of issues: determination of the dominant position of an economic entity, abuse by regulated organizations, abuse of regional operators in the treatment of MSW, approaches to proving anticompetitive agreements.  Target. Development of uniform approaches in law enforcement practice in cases of violation of antitrust laws.

Excessive Pharmaceutical Pricing as an Abuse of Dominant Position – The Case of CD Pharma (Denmark)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Behrang Kianzad
Keyword(s):  
Public Procurement ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Pharmaceutical Market ◽  
Market Definition ◽  
Competition Authority ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Pharmaceutical Pricing ◽  
Relevant Market ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position

Abstract On 31 January 2018, the Danish Competition and Consumer Authority adopted a decision1 finding the Swedish company generic distributor CD Pharma in breach of Art. 102(a) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) by abusing its dominant position and having imposed excessive and unfair prices for the drug Syntocinon. The company increased the price of the drug by 2000% in the period April-October 2014 in the Danish pharmaceutical market. CD Pharma appealed to the Danish Competition Appeals Board,2 which on 29 November 2018 upheld the decision by the Authority. On subsequent appeal to the Danish Maritime and Commercial Court,3 the judgment by the previous court was upheld in a 3-2 decision on 2 March 2020, thus finding CD Pharma liable for infringement of Danish competition law as well as Art. 102(a) TFEU. The decision is final and not subject to further appeal. The case raises outstanding legal-economic issues regarding excessive pricing such as relevant market definition in pharmaceutical cases, the length of abuse, competitive price benchmarks, definition of economic value and the matter of dominance in public procurement and tenders. The case is rather unusual in that the alleged abusive period amounted to a six-month period, CD Pharma was the ‘losing’ party in the bidding process for the supply of the medicine in question, and CD Pharma subsequently had reduced prices through negotiations with the Danish central medicine procurer, Amgros. Similar to the Aspen Pharma decision4 by the Italian Competition Authority, where the Italian Medicine Agency (AIFA) reported the case to the Competition Authority, it was the Danish medicine procurer Amgros who had notified the Danish Competition and Consumer Authority about allegedly abusive practices. This subsequently led to an investigation and the adoption of the Decision. Following an introduction describing the Danish pharmaceutical market and specifics of the case, section two of this contribution details the proceedings at Danish Competition Authority. Section three depicts the proceedings at Competition Appeals Tribunal, and section four deals with the proceedings at the Maritime and Commercial Court. Section five concludes.

Analytical Review of Judicial Cases Considered with the Participation of Antimonopoly Bodies

2021 ◽  
pp. 106-109
Author(s):  
L. V. Vovkivskay ◽  
E. V. Savostina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
High Price ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Analytical Review

The review provides an analysis of the legal positions of arbitration courts in cases of violations of antitrust laws committed by abuse of a dominant position, setting a monopolistically high price, and entering into anticompetitive agreements between bidders and customers; claims of the antimonopoly authority; practice reducing the size of the administrative fine for violations of antitrust laws.Purpose: the formation of uniform approaches in law enforcement practice in cases of violation of antitrust laws.

Analytical review of judicial cases considered with the participation of an antimonopoly body

2020 ◽  
pp. 92-95
Author(s):  
L. V. Vovkivskaya ◽  
E. V. Savostina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Economic Entity ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Antimonopoly Law ◽  
Analytical Review

The review contains an analysis of the legal positions of the arbitration courts in cases of violation of the antimonopoly legislation regarding the consideration of the following issues: an order of the antimonopoly body on transferring to the budget the income received as a result of violation of the antimonopoly law; non-payment of services received under the contract as an abuse of a dominant position; trust agreement as a condition for the admissibility of an anti-competitive agreement; claims of the antimonopoly body on forcing an economic entity to comply with the instructions of this body.Purpose: the formation of uniform approaches in law enforcement practice in cases of violation of antitrust laws.

Analytical Review of Court Cases Considered with the Participation of Antimonopoly Authorities

2022 ◽  
pp. 88-92
Author(s):  
L. V. Vovkivskaya ◽  
E. V. Savostina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
State Preference ◽  
Analytical Review ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

Analysis of the legal positions of arbitration courts in cases of violation of antimonopoly legislation regarding the consideration of issues: the statute of limitations for bringing to administrative responsibility, the grounds for refusing to provide state preference, the consideration of complaints about the actions of bidders/operators carried out during the mandatory procedures applied in the bankruptcy case.Objective: to develop uniform approaches in law enforcement practice in cases of violation of antitrust laws.

Chimera of domestic antitrust: Institute of collective dominance in Russia

2021 ◽  
pp. 68-88
Author(s):  
A. E. Shastitko ◽  
K. A. Ionkina
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Market Analysis ◽  
Legal Norm ◽  
Economic Regulation ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Oligopoly Theory ◽  
Russian Version ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position ◽  
Collective Dominance

The paper defines the features of the collective dominance institute in Russia as well as the relation between collective dominance and oligopoly in the spheres of law and economic theory. The article evaluates the grounds and consequences of the collective dominance legal norm application; it suggests an approach to examining the relation between effects and expected results of this legal norm application and outlines the potential ways to harmonize the best international practices of the collective dominance norm application with the existing economic standards of product market analysis for the purpose of competition law enforcement. Results of the oligopoly theory and the Russian version of collective dominance institution key elements comparison show: the collective dominance institution concept is inadequately applied to identify individual abuse of dominant position due to possible law enforcement errors. The Russian version of collective dominance institution reflects one fundamental tendency intrinsic to Russian antitrust: examined more closely, law enforcement, which is de jure aimed at protecting competition, appears to be economic regulation, which de facto can lead to competition restriction. One of the possible structural alternatives for the collective dominance institution reforming is based on presumption of the need to analyze the joint impact exerted by a group of undertakings on the market.

Part II The Member State Reports on Transposition of the Directive, 4 Cyprus

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioannidou Maria
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Member State ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Parent Company ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Competition Law Enforcement ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position

This chapter examines how the Antitrust Damages Directive has been transposed in Cyprus. It begins with a discussion of the transposition procedure, focusing on the Cypriot competition regime as well as the state of private enforcement in Cyprus. In particular, it provides an overview of the law currently in force against anticompetitive agreements and abuse of dominant position, the Protection of Competition Law of 2008 (13(I)/2008), as amended in 2014 (Law 41(I)/2014) (Cypriot Competition Act), and the provisions relevant to private competition law enforcement. The chapter then considers the history and the different steps of the transposition process before describing the scope of the transposition measure. It also analyses the different provisions of the Cypriot Damages Act and issues that arose during the transposition, such as parent company liability, the binding force of decisions of competition authorities of other Member States, and presumption and quantification of damage caused by cartels or other antitrust infringements.

Companies’ interaction in the markets of joint productsin the context of the antitrust law enforcement

2017 ◽  
pp. 58-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Shastitko
Keyword(s):  
Game Theory ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Production Process ◽  
Production Technology ◽  
Theory Model ◽  
Dominant Position ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Joint Products ◽  
Abuse Of Dominant Position

The article considers the particularities of the relations between companies in the markets of joint products in Russia. These particularities correspond, first, to the production technology, when one input through unit production process gives several products; second, to the consequences of the privatization of production facilities created during the Soviet Union period. The article offers a game theory model that shows how companies may use antitrust authority in their interaction strategies. This in addition to other reasons might explain the amount of cases on the abuse of dominant position where companies, which produce joint products, are involved.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document