欧盟药品的过度定价:剥削和剥削性滥用之间的平衡

Mari Minn
{"title":"欧盟药品的过度定价:剥削和剥削性滥用之间的平衡","authors":"Mari Minn","doi":"10.1515/bjes-2020-0023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Normally, after the end of the exclusivity period offered by patents, medicines fall in public domain attracting competing companies to launch generic production that would bring down price levels. for different reasons, generic production of off-patented medicines does not always take place, allowing the main producer to continue dictate price levels. under some circumstances, this conduct may turn into exploitative abuse. However, excessive pricing itself is not anti-competitive unless other cost-and non-cost-related factors are present that turn excessive pricing a concern of competition law. The article analyses the most relevant Eu case-law on abusive pricing in the pharmaceutical sector questioning what the right benchmark price is in the light of the United Brands two-limb test. As economic calculations cannot provide universal solutions in these cases, the article suggests that the United Brands test should not be the only method to judge exploitative abuse, but rather a combination of different methods that need to be applied to achieve reliable results. As emphasised in several cases, both economic calculations and other factors should be considered to avoid the risk of false-positive results. furthermore, exploitative abuse exists only in case excessive pricing is additionally unfair. However, judging unfairness, as discussed in this article, is a complicated task where the outcomes depend on the impact of the test results on the competition process.","PeriodicalId":29836,"journal":{"name":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","volume":"10 1","pages":"91 - 108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Excessive Pricing of Pharmaceuticals in the EU: Balancing between Exploitation and Exploitative Abuse\",\"authors\":\"Mari Minn\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/bjes-2020-0023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Normally, after the end of the exclusivity period offered by patents, medicines fall in public domain attracting competing companies to launch generic production that would bring down price levels. for different reasons, generic production of off-patented medicines does not always take place, allowing the main producer to continue dictate price levels. under some circumstances, this conduct may turn into exploitative abuse. However, excessive pricing itself is not anti-competitive unless other cost-and non-cost-related factors are present that turn excessive pricing a concern of competition law. The article analyses the most relevant Eu case-law on abusive pricing in the pharmaceutical sector questioning what the right benchmark price is in the light of the United Brands two-limb test. As economic calculations cannot provide universal solutions in these cases, the article suggests that the United Brands test should not be the only method to judge exploitative abuse, but rather a combination of different methods that need to be applied to achieve reliable results. As emphasised in several cases, both economic calculations and other factors should be considered to avoid the risk of false-positive results. furthermore, exploitative abuse exists only in case excessive pricing is additionally unfair. However, judging unfairness, as discussed in this article, is a complicated task where the outcomes depend on the impact of the test results on the competition process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29836,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TalTech Journal of European Studies\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"91 - 108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TalTech Journal of European Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TalTech Journal of European Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2020-0023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要通常情况下,在专利提供的独家经营期结束后,药品进入公共领域,吸引竞争公司推出非专利生产,从而降低价格水平。出于不同的原因,非专利药品的非专利生产并不总是发生,这使得主要生产商可以继续决定价格水平。在某些情况下,这种行为可能会演变成剥削性虐待。然而,过度定价本身并不反竞争,除非存在其他成本和非成本相关因素,使过度定价成为竞争法关注的问题。本文分析了欧盟关于制药行业滥用定价的最相关判例法,根据联合品牌的双肢测试,质疑什么是正确的基准价格。由于经济计算无法在这些情况下提供通用的解决方案,文章建议,联合品牌测试不应是判断剥削性虐待的唯一方法,而应是需要应用的不同方法的组合,以获得可靠的结果。正如在一些情况下强调的那样,应考虑经济计算和其他因素,以避免假阳性结果的风险。此外,剥削性虐待只存在于过度定价不公平的情况下。然而,正如本文所讨论的,判断不公平是一项复杂的任务,其结果取决于测试结果对竞争过程的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Excessive Pricing of Pharmaceuticals in the EU: Balancing between Exploitation and Exploitative Abuse
Abstract Normally, after the end of the exclusivity period offered by patents, medicines fall in public domain attracting competing companies to launch generic production that would bring down price levels. for different reasons, generic production of off-patented medicines does not always take place, allowing the main producer to continue dictate price levels. under some circumstances, this conduct may turn into exploitative abuse. However, excessive pricing itself is not anti-competitive unless other cost-and non-cost-related factors are present that turn excessive pricing a concern of competition law. The article analyses the most relevant Eu case-law on abusive pricing in the pharmaceutical sector questioning what the right benchmark price is in the light of the United Brands two-limb test. As economic calculations cannot provide universal solutions in these cases, the article suggests that the United Brands test should not be the only method to judge exploitative abuse, but rather a combination of different methods that need to be applied to achieve reliable results. As emphasised in several cases, both economic calculations and other factors should be considered to avoid the risk of false-positive results. furthermore, exploitative abuse exists only in case excessive pricing is additionally unfair. However, judging unfairness, as discussed in this article, is a complicated task where the outcomes depend on the impact of the test results on the competition process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
62.50%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Threats to Diversity of Opinion and Freedom of Expression via Social Media Selected Legal Issues in Online Adult Education: Compliance of Online Learning and Teaching Process with GDPR Evolution of the European Union Development Policy towards India Divorce at the Notary: Protection of Creditors’ Interests Evolution of the Digital Economy and Society Index in the European Union: Α Socioeconomic 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