Margin squeeze is a form of abuse of a dominant position in which a vertically integrated company reduces the margin between the price charged to competitors and the price charged to consumers, which can have the effect of excluding a competitor from the market. In the decade or so since the liberalisation of network industries, margin squeeze has become a major source of concern among competition authorities and courts, particularly pronounced in the electronic communications sector. Because some of the adopted decisions show significant inconsistencies in approach, and legal certainty remains elusive in this area, this book which provides an extremely thorough analysis is both timely and of great practical value. The author provides an in-depth examination of margin squeeze allegations in the electronic communications sector with a view to developing a more advanced and comprehensive analysis of principles which should guide ex post assessment of margin squeeze. Issues and topics covered include: – scope of intervention in margin squeeze cases both for national regulatory and national competition authorities; – conditions for sanctioning margin squeeze under Article 102; – methodological and practical difficulties in identifying a margin squeeze; – methodology employed in margin squeeze cases and its regulatory aspects; – assessment of the ability and incentives of regulated firms to engage in a margin squeeze; and – situations when competition law is used to address the deficits of regulation and regulatory failures. It also includes a critical comparison of the vertical foreclosure analysis undertaken in margin squeeze cases with the approach adopted in the EU Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines. Throughout the analysis, margin squeeze treatment in the European Union and its Member States is examined in light of the diverging approach adopted by the US Supreme Court. The increasing complexity of the electronic communications market can only further confound an already complex assessment of price squeezes, and one can expect that claims of anticompetitive margin squeeze in liberalised network industries will continue to be high on the enforcement agenda of competition authorities for years to come. In light of the need for a coherent, or at least predictable, sentencing policy to provide relative legal certainty, the research in this book proves invaluable. The analysis and conclusions discussed in this book will be welcomed by policymakers, regulators, and lawyers working in the areas of competition law and electronic communications law.

A margin squeeze is an exclusionary form of abuse of a dominant position that a vertically integrated firm can implement when it sells its upstream bottleneck input to its downstream competitors. Because it is vertically integrated, the dominant incumbent can reduce the margin between the input price charged to competitors and the retail price charged to end-users by either raising the price of the input and/or lowering the price of its retail product/services to such an extent that the remaining margin of profit is insufficient for its rivals to remain competitive. Although the scenario of margin squeeze seems to be rather simple, the underlying economic and legal theories are not. Consequently, detecting a margin squeeze requires competition authorities to apply a complex imputation test, which in turn requires various methodological choices that can determine the outcome of the investigation. The principal purpose of the dissertation is to determine whether the European Commission's margin squeeze decisions are consistent with EU case law. The dissertation examines two alternative hypotheses. Under hypothesis A, margin squeeze is presented as a deviation from the essential facilities doctrine, which could be seen as an expression of regulatory competition law. Hypothesis B assumes that it constitutes another form of vertical foreclosure, the main question then being under what exact conditions foreclosure is likely in network industries where the margin squeeze doctrine traditionally applies. Two conclusions follow from the analysis. First, margin squeeze constitutes another theory of vertical foreclosure, and accordingly cannot be seen as an unjustified deviation from refusal to deal and essential facilities cases. Second, to ensure that the theory of harm in margin squeeze cases is credible, competition authorities could enhance their current analytical framework by regularly reviewing various additional elements, in particular the extent to which the wholesale product is important for downstream competition.

Although competition law and intellectual property are often interwoven, until this book there has been little guidance on how they work together in practice. As the intersection between the two fields continues to grow worldwide, both in case law and in regulation, the book's markets-based approach, focusing on sectors such as pharmaceuticals, IT, telecoms, energy and agriculture in eleven of the world's most active jurisdictions, provides a much-needed in-depth understanding of how this interplay reveals itself among the different legal systems. Written by a range of authors including judges, regulators, academics, economists and practitioners in both fields, the book provides an international comparative perspective as well as detailed analysis of specific cases, policies and proposals for change. Among the issues and topics covered are the following: – free movement of goods and the protection of intellectual property rights; – standard essential patents & injunction in patent cases; – intellectual property rights between technological development and consumer protection; – geo-blocking; – online platforms and antitrust; – excessive prices. In this context, special attention is paid throughout to the increasing dialogue among Competition Authorities and between Judges and Competition Authorities around the world. As matchless remedy for the lack of uniformity heretofore, the book's investigation of the nexus between competition law and intellectual property in different sectors and in various countries takes a giant step towards a more-balanced approach and more-levelled regulation and practices. It will be warmly appreciated by policy makers, decision makers, regulators, practitioners and academics in both competition law and intellectual property fields

Competition enforcement authorities use settlements as a tool to ensure compliance with antitrust law. Companies can make commitments to remedy breaches, ensuring that they avoid litigation and potential fines and reputational damage. The author of this highly original and innovative book shows that, rather than fines or arguing principles of competition law in litigation, antitrust settlements (namely U.S. consent decrees and EU commitment decisions) hold the key to globally effective enforcement, particularly in the digital and blockchain era. Antitrust law does not necessarily need to be abolished, but rather should be fully exploited as an economic regulation led by antitrust settlements. In supporting her thesis, the author examines such elements of competition enforcement as the following: drawbacks of allowing the courts to regulate markets; whether antitrust settlements sacrifice antitrust deterrence; how settlements rapidly and surgically regulate markets; comparative analysis between U.S. consent decrees and EU commitment decisions; economic analysis on the adoption of antitrust settlements in both the U.S. and EU markets from 2013 to 2018; fundamental role of antitrust settlements in regulating the current digital markets; and comprehensive description on how to use antitrust settlements to regulate the data industry. With its thorough guidance on U.S. consent decrees and EU commitment decisions from their functioning to their characteristics and procedure—and its extensive treatment of the main antitrust remedies available and used in enforcing of antitrust law in both the U.S. and EU—the book provides both an economic and a legal analysis of the functioning and the scope of antitrust settlements. It assesses the influence of decisions on companies’ behavior and agencies’ practice, using economic analysis to show the procompetitive or anticompetitive effects of remedies, with special attention to digital markets. Because markets have become so dynamic and unpredictable that is difficult to preserve efficiency, the author says, there is a little room for law—economic regulation is a better fit. This book is a springboard to further investigate how a simple antitrust enforcement tool, having turned competition law into an economic regulation policy, can drive our economy, leading both the antitrust and regulatory interventions in tackling today’s market challenges.

Leniency has emerged as one of the main enforcement instruments used by competition authorities to combat cartels. Offering immunity from punishment is believed to destabilise already existing cartels and deter undertakings from entering into such arrangements. This book offers the first in-depth analysis of the scope of leniency in European Union (EU) competition law, considering three crucial ramifications – ensuring a leniency applicant can self-report with confidence, retaining the right to compensation of those who have suffered losses due to the cartel and furthering the objective of undistorted competition within the internal market. With thorough insight into the interaction between the Commission’s Leniency Notice and public and private enforcement, the author fully explains such aspects of the subject as the following: who is eligible for leniency; liability of an immunity recipient; the EU fining system; disclosure of leniency evidence; scope of public authorities reaching out to cartel infringers; the immunity recipient and follow-on damages claimants; the immunity recipient and subsequent leniency applicants; effect of the Damages Directive; and the European Economic Area dimension. The author offers cogent suggestions about how the shortcomings of the Commission’s leniency offer can be ameliorated and which regulatory steps should be taken to give the policy greater leverage. The author calls for increased harmonisation at national level in the EU and compares leniency practice in US antitrust law. As a comprehensive analysis of the practical application of current policy and procedure in EU cartel enforcement, the book clearly shows the ways in which the scope of leniency is manifest in the interaction between public and private enforcement, evaluating which interaction is most effective. Its practical character will be recognised and welcomed by competition law practitioners and policymakers, who will strengthen their grasp of leniency procedure and clearly discern implications for competition infringement cases.

How does it come about that a certain firm dominates a market? Can an understanding of this process lead to a more effective enforcement of competition law? That is the question approached in this compelling book. The author reviews the European Union’s (EU’s) Article 102 case law, comparing it with United States (US) provisions, demonstrating that new ways of looking at market power are needed – today’s tech giants differ from older monopolies. He clarifies the role of dominant firms in the competitive process, proposing that conduct should be scrutinized differently depending on the source of market power, rather than using the same approach for all dominant undertakings. Supporting his contention that the legal consequences that derive from holding a dominant position cannot be disassociated from the sources of that market power—that a dynamic understanding of dominance requires looking both forwards and backwards in time—the author examines such sources of dominance as the following: ‒ statutory dominance derived from explicit protectionist measures or subtler geoeconomic strategies; ‒ legacy firms such as the telecommunications or transport industries; ‒ natural monopolies, e.g., the exploitation of a mine; ‒ investment efforts undertaken in a competitive environment; ‒ intangible resources such as timing, reputation, experience, innovation capabilities, or managerial processes; ‒ lucky monopolies; and ‒ anticompetitive behavior on the road to dominance. Drawing insights from EU and US case law, industrial organization scholarship, and strategic management literature, the book resolves questions related to the role that the origins of market power have played and should play in the enforcement of EU competition rules against dominant firms. It concludes with a list of policy recommendations bringing the application of Article 102 TFEU against dominant firms more in line with the objective of protecting the competitive process. With its focus on how EU competition law enforcement should be fine-tuned to adequately incorporate the origins of firm dominance into the analysis of single-firm behavior, the book makes a major contribution to the analysis of anticompetitive effects. Practitioners, competition authorities, and academics in competition law will greatly appreciate the book’s combination of legal analysis and recommendations for policy reform.