Bill Allan, Apr 01, 2006
DG Competition’s discussion paper appears to signal a departure from the form-based approach articulated most strongly in Michelin II. However, its full significance is limited by the enunciation of a precautionary principle under which abuse is framed to capture any conduct likely to limit entry or expansion and justification is limited to the narrowest plausible extent. While that approach reflects a concern to prevent the erection of artificial entry barriers, it results in rules that undervalue existing competition. That risk is compounded by a narrow approach to market definition and dominance. These problems will only be avoided if the European Commission fully embraces a standard based on a determination that the disputed conduct substantially lessens effective competition in a way that can effectively be remedied by intervention under Article 82 of the EC Treaty.
Featured News
French Antitrust Raid Targets Passenger Transport Sector
Feb 18, 2026 by
CPI
FTC Moves to Bring Back Rules To Make It Easier for Consumers to Cancel Subscriptions
Feb 18, 2026 by
CPI
California Lawmaker Backs Sweeping Antitrust Overhaul
Feb 18, 2026 by
CPI
Brazil’s Competition Authority Probes Microsoft’s Jumpstart Program Over Browser Concerns
Feb 18, 2026 by
CPI
The Battle Between CFTC and State Regulators Over Prediction Markets Spreads to Capitol Hill
Feb 18, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Hub-&-Spoke Conspiracies
Jan 26, 2026 by
CPI
A Data Analytics Company as the Hub in a Hub-and-Spoke Cartel
Jan 26, 2026 by
Joseph Harrington
Hub and Spoke Cartels
Jan 26, 2026 by
Patrick Van Cayseele
Hub-and-Spoke Collusion or Vertical Exclusion? Identifying the Rim in Hub-and-Spoke Conspiracies
Jan 26, 2026 by
Rosa Abrantes-Metz, Pedro Gonzaga, Laura Ildefonso & Albert Metz
The Algorithmic Middleman in a Hub-and-Spoke Conspiracy: Divergent Court Decisions and the Expanding Patchwork of State and Local Regulations
Jan 26, 2026 by
Bradley C. Weber