IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jcomle/v11y2015i3p671-700..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hidden Efficiencies: The Relevance Of Business Justifications In Abuse Of Dominance Cases

Author

Listed:
  • Hans W. Friederiszick
  • Linda Gratz

Abstract

This article assesses the relevance of efficiencies and other justifications in recent Article 102 TFEU cases. Based on a review of all EU decisions and openings between 2009 and mid-2013, we find that procompetitive justifications still play an unsatisfactory role in the EU Commission's evaluations, except in IT-related abuse cases. This stands in contrast to the policy goals expressed during the reform phase (from 2005 to 2009), the Guidance Paper, and the increasing relevance of efficiency considerations in merger proceedings. We argue that this development is due to a malfunctioning of the balancing test—that is, the weighting of pro- and anticompetitive effects, as pro- and anticompetitive effects are often non-separable and non-monotone in Article 102 TFEU cases. Policy options are discussed, and it is argued that a fully integrated analysis is the only policy option fully addressing the problem.

Suggested Citation

  • Hans W. Friederiszick & Linda Gratz, 2015. "Hidden Efficiencies: The Relevance Of Business Justifications In Abuse Of Dominance Cases," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 671-700.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:11:y:2015:i:3:p:671-700.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhv021
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L21 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Business Objectives of the Firm
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:11:y:2015:i:3:p:671-700.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcle .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.