TENDANCES : ARTICLE 82 EC - LIGNES DIRECTRICES - ORIENTATION - CRITERES ECONOMIQUES - PRATIQUES PRO-CONCURRENTIELLES - ENTREPRISES DOMINANTES

The EU guidance on exclusionary abuses: A step forward or a missed opportunity?

Quelles sont les conséquences pour les entreprises de la Communication de la Commission concernant l’article 82 du Traité ? Rend-elle l’action de la Commission plus prévisible ? L’utilisation de nombreux critères économiques réduit-elle le risque que les pratiques pro-concurrentielles des entreprises dominantes soient considérées abusives ? Les articles de ce dossier présentent les opinions de juristes d’entreprise, économistes, avocats et chercheurs. Les points de vue ici exprimés sont personnels à leurs auteurs.

PRESENTATION Francesco ROSATI Economist, Partner, Brussels 1. In December 2008, the European Commission issued a communication providing guidance on its enforcement priorities in applying Article 82 EC to exclusionary conduct by dominant firms (hereafter “the Communication”). The Communication is the result of a long elaboration process, as part of which the Commission published a Discussion Paper in December 2005, and held a public consultation process which yielded more than one hundred written comments. 2. The goals that the Commission had set itself when embarking on this project were ambitious and to some extent incompatible. The past approach towards exclusionary conduct, largely based on form-based rules and per se prohibitions, is considered by many excessively restrictive

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, Ioannis Lianos, Francesco Rosati, Philippe Choné, Geoffrey D. Oliver, Florence Ninane, Hendrik Bourgeois, Niamh McCarthy, Johanne Peyre, James Killick, The EU guidance on exclusionary abuses: A step forward or a missed opportunity?, May 2009, Concurrences Review N° 2-2009, Art. N° 25847, pp. 9-39

Visites 6719

All reviews