Article 82 EC – The Problems and The Solution

John T. Lang

No 54282, Institutions and Markets Papers from Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM)

Abstract: The Commission's Guidance paper on exclusionary abuse under Article 82 EC is open to three fundamental criticisms. First, it leads to less legal certainty, because the rules suggested are vague and imprecise, because dominant companies will not have the information needed to apply them, and because the Commission is trying to change the law, which it has no power to do. Second, it would lead to some anticompetitive effects, because in practice it discourages price competition, by discouraging individualised price negotiations and retroactive rebates, and by suggesting that the Commission will protect not-yet-as-efficient competitors from price competition. Third, it leads to too many "false positives", i.e., findings of exclusionary abuse that are not justified in economics or law. The solution is to return to the test in the Treaty as interpreted by the Court of Justice: an exclusionary abuse must involve limiting the production, marketing or technical development of competitors of the dominant company, if harm is caused to consumers.

Keywords: Institutional; and; Behavioral; Economics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 37
Date: 2009-10
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/54282/files/65-09.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:feemim:54282

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.54282

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Institutions and Markets Papers from Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().