Abstract

The decisions adopted during the period under consideration indicate that the Commission continues to resort to ‘reconstructed’ market share data, notably in several Phase I commitments cases. Another striking feature of the jurisprudence adopted in 2014 is the apparent emergence of a new tool to test closeness of competition—the so-called ‘aggressive competitor’ test. Generally, the Commission seems to pay more attention to claims by notifying parties that spare capacity in the hands of competitors would render unprofitable a price increase by the merged entity. The jurisprudence confirms that an inherited FRAND commitment negates the ability of the merged entity to pursue a foreclosure strategy.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call