New Zealand Business Law Quarterly, 2013
14 Pages Posted: 4 Nov 2012 Last revised: 11 Apr 2013
Date Written: November 2, 2012
The proper interpretation of the abuse of dominance provisions in Section 36 of the New Zealand Commerce Act has been a matter of controversy. The courts of New Zealand have taken a view of the requirements of this important provision of competition law in a narrow and formal manner that makes it very difficult to take enforcement action against conduct which has a net anticompetitive effect, but which has no, or at best minimal, business or procompetitive justification. We offer this white paper to provide a United States perspective to suggest that the current counterfactual test applied by the courts of New Zealand is not an effective enforcement tool and significantly out of step with the interpretation of unilateral conduct by dominant firms in the United States.
Keywords: New Zealand, Commerce Act, Commerce Commission, monopolization, abuse of dominance, counterfactual, rule of reason, Microsoft, Telecom
JEL Classification: D4, D42, K4, K21, L12, L4
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Cross, Jeffery M. and Richards, J. Douglas and Stucke, Maurice E. and Waller, Spencer Weber, Use of Dominance, Unlawful Conduct, and Causation Under Section 36 of the New Zealand Commerce Act: A U.S. Perspective (November 2, 2012). New Zealand Business Law Quarterly, 2013; University of Tennessee Legal Studies Research Paper No. 208. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2170538