Indispensability and Abuse of Dominance: From Commercial Solvents to Slovak Telekom and Google Shopping

Forthcoming, Journal of European Competition Law & Practice

47 Pages Posted: 16 Dec 2019 Last revised: 9 Jan 2020

See all articles by Pablo Ibáñez Colomo

Pablo Ibáñez Colomo

London School of Economics - Law Department

Date Written: December 11, 2019

Abstract

Evidence that an input or platform is indispensable is sometimes required to establish an abuse of a dominant position under Article 102 TFEU; the circumstances in which this condition is required are not clear.

A systematic analysis of the case law suggests that indispensability is required where intervention (i) would be structural and/or (ii) would amount to prescribing the terms and conditions of access to an input or platform (‘proactive intervention’).

The analysis of the case law is useful to shed light on the controversies around recent cases, such as Google Shopping and Slovak Telekom, and ongoing investigations by the European Commission.

Keywords: Article 102 TFEU; indispensability; essential facilities; tying; input; platform; access; remedies; self-preferencing; digital

JEL Classification: K21, L14, L24, L41, L42

Suggested Citation

Ibáñez Colomo, Pablo, Indispensability and Abuse of Dominance: From Commercial Solvents to Slovak Telekom and Google Shopping (December 11, 2019). Forthcoming, Journal of European Competition Law & Practice. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3502519 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3502519

Pablo Ibáñez Colomo (Contact Author)

London School of Economics - Law Department ( email )

Houghton Street
London WC2A 2AE, WC2A 2AE
United Kingdom

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
208
Abstract Views
759
rank
150,843
PlumX Metrics