Self-preferencing : an EU and US perspective following the ECJ Google shopping ruling

Webinaire organisé par Concurrences, en partenariat avec Sidley Austin et Charles River Associates, en présence de Brice Allibert (Deputy Head of Unit, European Commission DG COMP), Cristina Caffarra (Senior Consultant, CRA International), Timothy Muris (Foundation Professor of Law and Senior Counsel, George Mason University (Fairfax), Sidley Austin), Kristina Nordlander (Partner, Sidley Austin) et Monika Zdzieborska (Associate, Sidley Austin).

 Synthèse : Accessible aux abonnés Concurrences+ (prochainement publiée ci-dessus)

 Retranscription : Accessible aux abonnés Concurrences+ (prochainement publiée ci-dessus)

 Articles Concurrences (Cliquez sur Voir plus ci-dessous)

Consultez la section "Prochaines Conferences" pour vous inscrire aux futurs webinaires.


Kristina Nordlander moderated the discussion. The General Court’s decision on the 10th of November confirmed a “self-preferencing” theory of harm. Indeed, in certain conditions, self-preferencing can constitute an abuse of a dominant position. The case was about Google being found to have treated its own comparison-shopping service better than competing services that were subject to other, less favorable rules.

The discussion focused on four main topics. First, the panel discussed what the Court said on how to define self-preferencing abuse. Second, a presentation of the legal test applied by the Court. Third, panelists discussed whether the Court’s approach to this type of conduct makes sense from an economic perspective. Finally, the last points concerned the wider implication, what does this mean for ongoing and future cases, for the Commission’s and Member States’ big tech agenda, and from a US perspective.

L'accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés

Déjà abonné ? Identifiez-vous

L’accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés.

Lire gratuitement un article

Vous pouvez lire cet article gratuitement en vous inscrivant.