CASE COMMENT: UNILATERAL PRACTICES - PREDATION - RECOUPMENT OF LOSSES - MEETING COMPETITION DEFENCE

Predation: The European Court of Justice rules that possibility of recoupment is not part of the legal test for predation; meeting competition defence is not available for dominant firms engaging in predatory pricing (France Télécom)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. In its judgment in Wanadoo, the Court of First Instance confirmed the Commission's condemnation of pricing practices implemented by France Télécom at the time of the launch of high-speed internet access for individuals in France (CFI, 30 January 2007, France Télécom v Commission, T 340/03, ECR p. II-107, note A.-L. Sibony, [2007] ECR II-107).LPA, June 6, 2007, pp. 14-22). This judgment had attracted attention because the Wanadoo case was the first in a long time to give the Community judge the opportunity to rule on the analysis of predation prices. However, since the judgments in Akzo and Tetra Pak II (ECJ, 3 July 1991, AKZO v Commission, C 62/86, ECR I 3359;

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

Author

  • Catholic University of Louvain

Quotation

Anne-Lise Sibony, Predation: The European Court of Justice rules that possibility of recoupment is not part of the legal test for predation; meeting competition defence is not available for dominant firms engaging in predatory pricing (France Télécom), 2 April 2009, Concurrences N° 2-2009, Art. N° 26022, pp. 112-116

Visites 3655

All reviews