MONGOUACHON Claire, Thèse, université Paul-Cézanne – Aix-Marseille III, 2010, 524 p.

Abus de position dominante et secteur public L’application par les autorités de la concurrence du droit des abus de position dominante aux opérateurs publics

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article.

Because of the means at their disposal, public operators have a strong position in the market. This is why the concept of abuse of a dominant position is so often used against them by the competition authorities. But is the rule of ordinary law capable of resolving the particular problems posed by the intervention of public operators on the market? The decision-making practice of national and European competition authorities and courts shows a certain tension between, on the one hand, a tendency towards uniformity of solutions with those prevailing for any ordinary company and, on the other hand, the appearance of new incriminations and reasoning. This ambivalence can be overcome by using the conceptual analysis of the EU competition model. At a time when the European Commission and the national competition authorities are committed to modernising the law on abuses of dominant positions in order to take greater account of economic tools, the foundations of the original model deserve to be questioned. Shaped by an ordoliberal thinking at the service of the economic freedom of operators who are intransigent in the face of market power, this model remains highly relevant to the public sector. Capable of adjusting its reasoning to take into account the privileges and constraints of general interest linked to public interventionism, the ordoliberal model is an effective means of regulating competition in the public sector.

This book has been edited in the collection under the scientific direction of Professor Laurence Idot.

PDF Version


  • University of Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne


Stéphane Rodrigues, Abus de position dominante et secteur public , May 2011, Concurrences N° 2-2011, Art. N° 36160, p. 244

Visites 2094

All reviews