美国反托拉斯法和欧盟竞争法下的混合约束和混合测试

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW World Competition Pub Date : 2020-06-01 DOI:10.54648/woco2020013
B. Balasingham
{"title":"美国反托拉斯法和欧盟竞争法下的混合约束和混合测试","authors":"B. Balasingham","doi":"10.54648/woco2020013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The distinction between horizontal and vertical agreements is not always as obvious as suggested in case law. In particular, under US antitrust law, the current case law on section 1 of the Sherman Act sets out a dichotomy between horizontal and vertical restraints. Yet, the commercial reality, as seen for instance in the e-commerce sector, is that the line between those two types of restraints is sometimes blurred. As more recent cases have shown, the legal assessment of vertical restraints that have horizontal effect is more difficult compared to purely vertical or horizontal restraints. Under US antitrust and EU competition law the assessment of those ‘hybrid restraints’ is further obfuscated due to the emergence of intermediate approaches to the rule of reason/per se rule in section 1 of the Sherman Act and arguably the restriction by object/restriction by effect categories in Article 101 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) respectively. This article explores whether those intermediate approaches are suitable for the legal assessment of vertical restraints with horizontal effect and how the analyses could be conducted in order to be more administrable.\nvertical restraints, horizontal restraints, hybrid restraints, Most-Favoured Nation clauses, resale price maintenance, rule of reason, per se rule, restriction by object, restriction by effect, Article 101 TFEU","PeriodicalId":43861,"journal":{"name":"World Competition","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hybrid Restraints and Hybrid Tests Under US Antitrust and EU Competition Law\",\"authors\":\"B. Balasingham\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/woco2020013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The distinction between horizontal and vertical agreements is not always as obvious as suggested in case law. In particular, under US antitrust law, the current case law on section 1 of the Sherman Act sets out a dichotomy between horizontal and vertical restraints. Yet, the commercial reality, as seen for instance in the e-commerce sector, is that the line between those two types of restraints is sometimes blurred. As more recent cases have shown, the legal assessment of vertical restraints that have horizontal effect is more difficult compared to purely vertical or horizontal restraints. Under US antitrust and EU competition law the assessment of those ‘hybrid restraints’ is further obfuscated due to the emergence of intermediate approaches to the rule of reason/per se rule in section 1 of the Sherman Act and arguably the restriction by object/restriction by effect categories in Article 101 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) respectively. This article explores whether those intermediate approaches are suitable for the legal assessment of vertical restraints with horizontal effect and how the analyses could be conducted in order to be more administrable.\\nvertical restraints, horizontal restraints, hybrid restraints, Most-Favoured Nation clauses, resale price maintenance, rule of reason, per se rule, restriction by object, restriction by effect, Article 101 TFEU\",\"PeriodicalId\":43861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Competition\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Competition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/woco2020013\",\"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":"World Competition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/woco2020013","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

横向协议和纵向协议之间的区别并不总是像判例法中所建议的那样明显。特别是在美国反垄断法下,现行《谢尔曼法》第1条的判例法规定了横向限制和纵向限制的二分法。然而,商业现实,例如在电子商务领域,这两种限制之间的界限有时是模糊的。正如最近的案例所表明的那样,与纯粹的垂直或水平限制相比,对具有水平影响的垂直限制的法律评估更加困难。根据美国反托拉斯法和欧盟竞争法,由于《谢尔曼法》第1节中理性规则/本身规则的中间方法的出现,以及《欧盟运作条约》(TFEU)第101条中可论证的对象限制/效果限制类别的出现,对这些“混合限制”的评估进一步模糊不清。本文探讨了这些中间方法是否适用于具有水平效应的纵向限制的法律评估,以及如何进行分析以使其更具可管理性。纵向限制,横向限制,混合限制,最惠国条款,转售价格维持,理性规则,本身规则,目标限制,效果限制,TFEU第101条
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
Hybrid Restraints and Hybrid Tests Under US Antitrust and EU Competition Law
The distinction between horizontal and vertical agreements is not always as obvious as suggested in case law. In particular, under US antitrust law, the current case law on section 1 of the Sherman Act sets out a dichotomy between horizontal and vertical restraints. Yet, the commercial reality, as seen for instance in the e-commerce sector, is that the line between those two types of restraints is sometimes blurred. As more recent cases have shown, the legal assessment of vertical restraints that have horizontal effect is more difficult compared to purely vertical or horizontal restraints. Under US antitrust and EU competition law the assessment of those ‘hybrid restraints’ is further obfuscated due to the emergence of intermediate approaches to the rule of reason/per se rule in section 1 of the Sherman Act and arguably the restriction by object/restriction by effect categories in Article 101 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) respectively. This article explores whether those intermediate approaches are suitable for the legal assessment of vertical restraints with horizontal effect and how the analyses could be conducted in order to be more administrable. vertical restraints, horizontal restraints, hybrid restraints, Most-Favoured Nation clauses, resale price maintenance, rule of reason, per se rule, restriction by object, restriction by effect, Article 101 TFEU
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
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
The Decriminalization of Cartel Activity in Kuwait: A Regulatory Framework Collective or Collusive Agreements? World Competition Book Review: Regulation 1/2003 and EU Antitrust Enforcement: A Systematic Guide Kris Dekeyser, Céline Gauer, Johannes Laitenberger, Nils Wahl, Wouter Wils & Luca Prete (Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer 2023) Big Data Requests: The Commission’s Powers to Collect Documents in Investigations Under Articles 101 and 102 TFEU
×
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