Previous article Next article

See version in english Efficiency defences in abuse of dominance cases

TENDANCES : GAINS D’EFFICACITE - ABUS DE POSITION DOMINANTE

Efficiency defences in abuse of dominance cases

L’existence et l’application de la soi-disant "exception d’efficience" de l’article 102 du TFUE ont fait l’objet de grandes discussions ces dernières années. Le document d’orientation de 2009 a donné un nouvel essor à la notion. Les articles réunis dans ce tendances donnent le point de vue de l’Union européenne et des droits nationaux. L’existence, la légitimité et l’application de l’ « exception d’efficience » sont examinées à travers la jurisprudence. Bien que le point de départ de chaque auteur soit différent, on retrouve des similarités d’analyse dans leurs contributions.

INTRODUCTION Assimakis KOMNINOS Local Partner, White & Case, Brussels 1. At the time of the adoption by DG Competition of the 2005 Discussion Paper and the 2009 Guidance Paper on exclusionary abuses, the treatment by EU competition law of the so-called “efficiency defence” arose as a topic of great academic and practical importance. It is by no chance that the emergence of this notion had to wait for the advent of the “new economic approach” in Article 102 TFEU. Indeed, as late as 2002, the Commission’s Glossary of Terms used in EU competition law [1] had not a single reference to the term “efficiency,” not to mention “efficiency defence,” although it did speak about practices that were “objectively justified.” 2. Nowadays, the concept of “efficiency defence” is well-accepted and no

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Authors

Quotation

Assimakis Komninos, Ekaterina Rousseva, Christopher Brown, Victoria Mertikopoulou, Gianluca Faella, Antonello Schettino, Efficiency defences in abuse of dominance cases, May 2014, Concurrences Review N° 2-2014, Art. N° 65382, www.concurrences.com

Visites 1021

All reviews