Alfonso Lamadrid on Chillin Competition, commented earlier today on an interesting paper by Javier Berasategi bringing together issues of competition law, supermarkets and technology. In passing he noted that I’d already brought groceries and tech together with my “exploding banana hypothesis.” I’m grateful to him for highlighting my valuable contribution to the jurisprudence on perishable fruit and cross border trade. For the curious, here are the relevant paragraphs from my book on competition law and regulation of technology markets: 7.07 Are there circumstances where product design can achieve what would otherwise be unlawful under the competition rules? 7.08 For example, EU competition law prohibits many vertical restraints that restrict parallel trade. In the United Brands case the Commission, in a decision upheld […]
Commentary Elsewhere: from writers around the web. Please note the explanation of this section on the “About the Site” page. From Competition Bulletin: Abuse of dominance: no commercial gain, no abuse? “Is it necessary for there to be some commercial benefit to be gained by a dominant undertaking from its conduct before that conduct can be condemned as abusive? No, says Mrs Justice Rose in Arriva the Shires Ltd v London Luton Airport Operations Ltd [2014] EWHC 64 (Ch). The case involved a claim by Arriva […]”
Commentary Elsewhere: from writers around the web. Please note the explanation of this section on the “About the Site” page. From Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog: Bork and Microsoft: Why Bork Was Right and What We Learn About Judging Exclusionary Behavior “Harry First (NYU) explains Bork and Microsoft: Why Bork Was Right and What We Learn About Judging Exclusionary Behavior. ABSTRACT:In 1998, twenty years after publishing The Antitrust Paradox, Robert Bork wrote: “The antitrust case brought by the Department of Justice…”
Too often we tend to assume that if we can write down a question – in a request for information – then business can write down the answer just as simply. (This is the second article in what I hope will be a series covering “Mistakes the Other Side Make”. For an introduction to the series see here. It says a lot about the European Commission that they allow me to publish articles that admit that not everything is perfect about how we work.) I’m guilty of this assumption. A few years ago I wrote a request for information to a company asking for a map of their entire corporate structure, together with background information on each company. The lawyer […]