Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=617263
 
 

Citations (8)



 
 

Footnotes (111)



 


 



Limiting the Scope of Article 82 of the EC Treaty: What can the EU Learn from the US Supreme Court's Judgment in Trinko in the wake of Microsoft, IMS, and Deutsche Telekom


Damien Geradin


George Mason University School of Law; Tilburg University - Tilburg Law and Economics Center (TILEC); Covington & Burling LLP


Common Market Law Review, December 2005

Abstract:     
This paper seeks to draw some insights from the landmark Supreme Court judgment in Trinko with a view to enlightening the current debate taking place in the EU over the proper scope of application of Article 82. Trinko is a particularly relevant judgment for EC competition lawyers since it addresses two extremely important questions related to the application of this provision of the Treaty. The first question relates to the extent to which dominant firms in possession of essential products or services should be mandated to give access to these inputs to their competitors. This question, which is at the core of the recent Microsoft decision and IMS judgment, does not find an obvious economic response. While granting access to "essential facilities" will stimulate competition in a secondary market (thereby contributing to allocative efficiency), it risks reducing the incentives for essential facility holders to invest. This issue also raises questions about the proper role of the competition authorities and the courts. Mandatory access involves complex price-related questions for which these institutions seem poorly equipped. The second question relates to the interface between competition law and sector-specific remedies. In many key sectors of the economy, which can be referred to as network industries, these two categories of remedy co-exist, thus raising problems of overlap or even conflicts. Trinko addresses this issue by saying that there is no space for competition law remedies once a sector-specific regime has been established. This approach seems to conflict with the Commission's decision in Deutsche Telekom, which rules that the presence of a regulatory remedy does not prevent the application of EC competition rules.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 30

Keywords: Antitrust, competition, Microsoft, monopolies, abuse of dominance, regulation, essential facilities

JEL Classification: L12, L41, L43, L51

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: November 13, 2004  

Suggested Citation

Geradin, Damien, Limiting the Scope of Article 82 of the EC Treaty: What can the EU Learn from the US Supreme Court's Judgment in Trinko in the wake of Microsoft, IMS, and Deutsche Telekom. Common Market Law Review, December 2005. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=617263

Contact Information

Damien Geradin (Contact Author)
George Mason University School of Law
3301 Fairfax Drive
Arlington, VA 22201
United States

George Mason Law School Logo

Tilburg University - Tilburg Law and Economics Center (TILEC) ( email )
Warandelaan 2
Tilburg, 5000 LE
Netherlands
HOME PAGE: http://www.tilburguniversity.nl/tilec/
Covington & Burling LLP ( email )
1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20004-2401
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 9,510
Downloads: 2,451
Download Rank: 2,479
Citations:  8
Footnotes:  111

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.391 seconds