The risks of a form-based approach to exclusionary abuses of dominance – an economic perspective

Q4 Social Sciences Competition Law Journal Pub Date : 2023-12-15 DOI:10.4337/clj.2023.03.02
William Ward, Joe Minichiello
{"title":"The risks of a form-based approach to exclusionary abuses of dominance – an economic perspective","authors":"William Ward, Joe Minichiello","doi":"10.4337/clj.2023.03.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Commission has initiated the process of changing how exclusionary abuses of dominance are evaluated, moving towards a more ‘form-based’ approach compared to the current ‘effects-based’ approach. This article explains that, if not implemented correctly, its planned approach risks worsening consumer outcomes. This article outlines the Commission’s existing approach to taking enforcement action against exclusionary abuses, and the two actions taken by the Commission to develop this approach. Then, it explores three cases where the false positives that arise from a form-based approach, rather than an effects-based approach, risk worsening outcomes for consumers. It suggests that, while an effects-based approach has its limitations, the Commission should ensure that it does not err too far into adopting a completely form-based approach as it develops updated rules on exclusionary abuses.","PeriodicalId":36415,"journal":{"name":"Competition Law Journal","volume":"35 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Competition Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/clj.2023.03.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The European Commission has initiated the process of changing how exclusionary abuses of dominance are evaluated, moving towards a more ‘form-based’ approach compared to the current ‘effects-based’ approach. This article explains that, if not implemented correctly, its planned approach risks worsening consumer outcomes. This article outlines the Commission’s existing approach to taking enforcement action against exclusionary abuses, and the two actions taken by the Commission to develop this approach. Then, it explores three cases where the false positives that arise from a form-based approach, rather than an effects-based approach, risk worsening outcomes for consumers. It suggests that, while an effects-based approach has its limitations, the Commission should ensure that it does not err too far into adopting a completely form-based approach as it develops updated rules on exclusionary abuses.
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
从经济角度看基于形式的排他性滥用支配地位方法的风险
欧盟委员会已经启动了改变排他性滥用支配地位评估方式的进程,与目前的 "基于效果 "的方法相比,该方法更倾向于 "基于形式 "的方法。本文解释说,如果执行不当,欧盟委员会计划采用的方法有可能导致消费者利益受损。本文概述了委员会对排除性滥用采取执法行动的现行方法,以及委员会为发展这一方法而采取的两项行动。然后,文章探讨了三个案例,在这些案例中,基于形式的方法而非基于效果的方法所产生的误判有可能使消费者的利益受损。报告建议,虽然基于效果的方法有其局限性,但委员会在制定关于排除性滥用的最新规则时,应确保不会过分采用完全基于形式的方法。
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
Competition Law Journal
Competition Law Journal Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
If the Competition and Markets Authority were an emoji: merger clearance lessons from Meta/Giphy Economists on trial: how to make expert duties, meetings, and hot tubs work The UK and EU competition rules for research and development agreements: falling out of lockstep The assessment and communication of the benefits of competition interventions by the Competition and Markets Authority The risks of a form-based approach to exclusionary abuses of dominance – an economic perspective
×
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