Abuse of Economic Dependence - The Centre for European Policy ...

Recommendations

Info

118 Bibliography I Roudard (1989), ‘The New French Legislation on Competition’ [1989] ECLR 10(2) 205–232. E Rousseva, ‘The Concept of ‘Objective Justification’ of an Abuse of a Dominant Position: Can it help to Modernise the Analysis under Article 82 EC?’ [2005] 2(2) Comp L Rev. M Salinger, ‘A Graphical Analysis of Bundling’ [1995] 68 J Bus 85 . R Schmalensee, ‘Output and Welfare Implications of Monopolistic Third- Degree Price Discrimination’ [1981] 71 The American Economic Review 242 R Schmalensee, Gaussian Demand and Commodity Bundling, [1984] 57 J Bus 211. M Schödermeier, Metro II et les limites de la distribution sélective (Cahiers de droit européen, 1987). M Schödermeier, ‘Collective dominance revisited: an analysis of the EC Commission’s new concepts of oligopoly control’ [1990] 11(1) ECLR, 11(1) 28–34. D Seidmann, ‘Bundling as a Facilitating Device: A Reinterpretation of Leverage Theory [1991] 58 Economica 491. A Shaked, J Sutton, ‘Relaxing Price Competition through Product Differentiation’ [1982] Review of Economic Studies 49. C Shapiro, ‘Mergers with Differentiated Products’ [1996] Antitrust 10. J Shaw, ‘Inter versus intra brand competition: dominant positions and ancillary markets’ [1987] E L Rev 12(3) 195–199. N Singh and X Vives, ‘Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly’ [1984] Rand Journal of Economics 15, 546–554. M Sousa Ferro (2007) ‘Reassessing Borders Between Agreements and Unilateral Practices after Case C-74/04’, Volkswagen II’ [2007] 28(3) ECLR 205–209. D Spector, ‘From harm to competitors to harm to competition: one more effort, please!’ [2006] 2(1) Euro CJ 145–162. C Stothers, ‘Refusal to Supply as Abuse of a Dominant Position: Essential Facilities in the European Union’ [2001] 7 ECLR. C Stothers, ‘Who Needs Intellectual Property? Competition Law and Restrictions on Parallel Trade Within the European Economic Area’ [2005] 27 (12) EIPR 458–466. A Stratakis, ‘Comparative Analysis of the US and EU Approach and Enforecement of the Essential Facilities Doctrine’ [2006] 27 ECLR 434. J Tirole, The Theory of Industrial Organization (Cambridge, Mass, The MIT Press, 1988). J Tirole, ‘The Analysis of Tying Cases: A Primer’ [2005] 1 Comp Policy Int’l 1. G Triantafillakis in I Kokkoris, Competition Cases from the European Union (Sweet and Maxwell, London, 2007).
Bibliography 119 Y Utzschneider, ‘France: Franchise Agreement—Positin of Economic Dependence’ [1998] 19 (5) ECLR, N82. HR Varian, ‘Price Discrimination and Social Welfare’ [1985] 75 The American Economic Review 870. J Venit, ‘Article 82: The Last Frontier—Fighting Fire with Fire?’ [2005] 28 Fordham International Law Journal 1157. Verordnung Gegen Missbrauch Wirtschaftlicher Machtstellungen, Reichsbesetzblatt [R6B1] I, 1067, 2 November 1923. B Vesterdorf, ‘Article 82 EC: Where do we stand after the Microsoft judgement?’, http://wwwiccqmulacuk/GAR/Vesterdorfpdf L Vogel (1998), ‘Competition Law and Buying Power: the Case for a New Approach in Europe’ [1998] 19 (1) ECLR 4–11. G Werden, ‘A Robust Test for Consumer Welfare Enhancing Mergers among Sellers of Differentiated Products’ [1982] Journal of Industrial Economics 44, 409–414. G Werden, L Froeb (2002), ‘Calibrated Economic Models Add Focus, Accuracy, and Persuasiveness to Merger Analysis’, www2owenvanderbiltedu/lukefroeb/papers/sca10pdf R Whish (2003), Competition Law (5th edn, Butterworths, UK). EC CASE LAW Case 6/72 Europemballage Corp and Continental Can Co. Inc v Commission (Continental Can), [1973] ECR I-215. British Airways plc v Commission, C95/04 P. Oscar Bronner v Mediaprint C-7/97 [1998] ECR I-7791. Case C-6/72 Continental Can v Commission [1973] ECR 215. Microsoft [2007] OJ L 32/23, Microsoft Corp v Commission, T-201/04 R, [2004] ECR II-4463, Microsoft Corp v Commission T-201/04, 17/09/2007. Case M308 Kali und Salz/MdK/Treuhand [1998] OJ C275/3; Cases 68/94 and C-30/95 France v Commission, Societe Commerciale es Potasses et de l’Azore (SCPA) v Commission [1998] ECR I-1375. Case 27/76, United Brands Co. and United Brands Continental BV v Commission [1978], ECR I-207. Case 85/76, Hoffmann-La Roche & Co AG v Commission [1979] ECR I- 461. ABG (1977) OJ L117/1. Magill (1989) OJ L78/43. Wea-Filipacchi Music SA (72/480/CEE), [1972] O.J. L303/52. Miller International Schallplatten GmbH (76/915/CEE), [1976] O.J. L357/40.
Page 1 and 2:
Introduction The Treaty of Rome 195
Page 3 and 4:
Introduction 3 tion of this concept
Page 5 and 6:
CHAPTER 1 Objectives of Article 82
Page 7 and 8:
Objectives of Article 82 7 economic
Page 9 and 10:
Objectives of Article 82 9 Director
Page 11 and 12:
Objectives of Article 82 11 Virtual
Page 13 and 14:
Objectives of Article 82 13 product
Page 15 and 16:
CHAPTER 2 Concept of Dominance The
Page 17 and 18:
Concept of Dominance 17 The stateme
Page 19 and 20:
Concept of Dominance 19 criticisms
Page 21 and 22:
CHAPTER 3 Abuse of Superior Bargain
Page 23 and 24:
Abuse of Superior Bargaining Positi
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
CHAPTER 4 The Gap in the Applicatio
Page 45 and 46:
The Gap in the Application of Artic
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
from the legal norm itself. Article
Page 63 and 64:
In this book we are focusing on the
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68: The Gap in the Application of Artic
Page 79 and 80: CHAPTER 5 How to Rectify the Gap Ge
Page 81 and 82: How to Rectify the Gap 81 As Faull
Page 83 and 84: How to Rectify the Gap 83 of the co
Page 85 and 86: How to Rectify the Gap 85 An argume
Page 87 and 88: How to Rectify the Gap 87 departing
Page 89 and 90: How to Rectify the Gap 89 mentioned
Page 91 and 92: How to Rectify the Gap 91 proportio
Page 93 and 94: How to Rectify the Gap 93 Depending
Page 95: How to Rectify the Gap 95 cases is
Page 98 and 99: 98 A Gap in the Enforcement of Arti
Page 100 and 101: 100 A Gap in the Enforcement of Art
Page 102 and 103: 102 A Gap in the Enforcement of Art
Page 105 and 106: Annex 1 REPORT PREPARED BY THE ICN
Page 107 and 108: Annex 2 REPORT PREPARED BY THE ICN
Page 109: Annex 4 Appendix C of the ICN Kyoto
Page 112 and 113: 112 Bibliography P Callol, P Pignat
Page 114 and 115: 114 Bibliography Guidance on the Co
Page 116 and 117: 116 Bibliography J Leibowitz, ‘Ta
Page 120: 120 Bibliography The Distillers Com
show all

Abuse of Economic Dependence - The Centre for European Policy ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?