The Ordoliberal Concept of 'Abuse' of a Dominant Position and its Impact on Article 102 TFEU

Peter Behrens
{"title":"The Ordoliberal Concept of 'Abuse' of a Dominant Position and its Impact on Article 102 TFEU","authors":"Peter Behrens","doi":"10.4337/9781788117340.00008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the impact of ordoliberal thinking on the drafting of the prohibition of \"abuse\" of a dominant position in the market that was included in the competition rules of the Rome Treaty establishing the European Economic Community as well as on its interpretation by the Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Firstly, it is shown that the ordoliberal school must not be regarded as a set of ideas frozen in its formative period of 1933 to 1950 or 1957 when the \"Freiburg School\" was established but rather as an approach that has been dynamically developed and refined over the last 75 years (i.e. over four generations of ordoliberals) up to the present day by integrating important new insights without, however, giving up its core tenets and convictions. Secondly, it is shown on the basis of the preparatory work which lead in the 1950ies to the Rome Treaty that the adoption of the concept of \"abuse\" for the control of dominant undertakings was due to the strong influence of the German negotiating team that consisted of (in the meantime second generation) ordoliberals. Thirdly, it is explained how ordoliberal thinking about the \"system of undistorted competition\" and the protection of \"residual competition against exclusionary practices\" has influenced the application of the \"abuse\" concept in the jurisprudence of the Commission and the CJEU from the Continental Can case to the recent Intel case. This approach has come under attack from welfare-economic approaches which emphasize efficiency instead of competition and which have accused the ordoliberal approach of formalism, lack of sufficient economic analysis, preoccupation with fairness, protection of competitors instead of competition, obsession with interventionist regulation etc. This paper demonstrates that all of these characterizations are based on fundamental misunderstandings of what ordoliberal thinking originally meant and what it stands for today.","PeriodicalId":345107,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Antitrust (Topic)","volume":"277 1-2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Antitrust (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788117340.00008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper explores the impact of ordoliberal thinking on the drafting of the prohibition of "abuse" of a dominant position in the market that was included in the competition rules of the Rome Treaty establishing the European Economic Community as well as on its interpretation by the Commission and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Firstly, it is shown that the ordoliberal school must not be regarded as a set of ideas frozen in its formative period of 1933 to 1950 or 1957 when the "Freiburg School" was established but rather as an approach that has been dynamically developed and refined over the last 75 years (i.e. over four generations of ordoliberals) up to the present day by integrating important new insights without, however, giving up its core tenets and convictions. Secondly, it is shown on the basis of the preparatory work which lead in the 1950ies to the Rome Treaty that the adoption of the concept of "abuse" for the control of dominant undertakings was due to the strong influence of the German negotiating team that consisted of (in the meantime second generation) ordoliberals. Thirdly, it is explained how ordoliberal thinking about the "system of undistorted competition" and the protection of "residual competition against exclusionary practices" has influenced the application of the "abuse" concept in the jurisprudence of the Commission and the CJEU from the Continental Can case to the recent Intel case. This approach has come under attack from welfare-economic approaches which emphasize efficiency instead of competition and which have accused the ordoliberal approach of formalism, lack of sufficient economic analysis, preoccupation with fairness, protection of competitors instead of competition, obsession with interventionist regulation etc. This paper demonstrates that all of these characterizations are based on fundamental misunderstandings of what ordoliberal thinking originally meant and what it stands for today.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
支配地位“滥用”的自由主义概念及其对第102条TFEU的影响
本文探讨了自由主义思想对建立欧洲经济共同体的《罗马条约》竞争规则中关于禁止“滥用”市场支配地位的规定的起草以及欧盟委员会和欧盟法院(CJEU)对该规定的解释的影响。首先,它表明,世界自由主义学派不应被视为在1933年至1950年或1957年“弗莱堡学派”成立的形成时期冻结的一套思想,而应被视为在过去75年(即超过四代世界自由主义者)中不断发展和完善的一种方法,直到今天,它整合了重要的新见解,但没有放弃其核心原则和信念。其次,根据20世纪50年代《罗马条约》的准备工作表明,采用“滥用”概念来控制主导企业是由于德国谈判小组的强大影响,该小组由(同时是第二代)自由主义者组成。第三,解释了关于“未扭曲竞争制度”和保护“剩余竞争反对排他性做法”的自由主义思想如何影响了欧盟委员会和欧洲法院从大陆Can案到最近的英特尔案中对“滥用”概念的适用。这种方法受到了福利经济方法的攻击,福利经济方法强调效率而不是竞争,并指责世界自由主义方法是形式主义,缺乏足够的经济分析,专注于公平,保护竞争者而不是竞争,痴迷于干预主义监管等。本文表明,所有这些特征都是基于对自由主义思想最初的含义及其今天所代表的意义的根本性误解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Can Collusion Promote Sustainable Consumption and Production? Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: A Comparison with, and Lessons from, the US Worlds Colliding: Competition Policy and Bankruptcy Asset Sales The Passing-On of Price Overcharges in European Competition Damages Actions: A Matter of Causation and an Issue of Policy How to Fix Unreasonable Merger Regulation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1