By: Alfonso Miranda Londoño & Juan D. Gutiérrez-Rodríguez
Historically, the airline industry has been characterized by the heavy regulation established by the State. In effect, during the first six decades of the existence of these services in most of the developed countries, the governments applied a strict regulation in all the aspects of the service, a strong policy of subsidies and different entry barriers of legal origin that restricted the competition in the market. However, in the seventies the government of the United States deregulated the market, liberalizing the tariffs and allowing the market to work with more flexibility. Deregulation gave antitrust law and important role in regards to the promotion and preservation of competition in the market.
In Colombia the evolution of the regulation of the airline industry has followed a similar tendency. Since the year 1992 until the issuance of the Resolution 3299 of 2007, the intervention of the Special Administrative Unit of Civil Aeronautics (AEROCIVIL) over the aeronautic tariffs consisted on their approval for each route on a maximum-minimum price basis. The issuance of the Resolution 3299 of 2007 by the AEROCIVIL, that liberated the national and international tariffs of the regular air transport of passengers had an immediate effect of increasing the competition, reflected on the substantial decrease of tariffs and the entrance of new firms.
Taking into account this context, the purpose of the paper is to present in detail the special competition regime in the Colombian aeronautical sector. The document explains the faculties of the as the competition authority of the aeronautics sector and analyzes the commercial policies of airlines and travel agencies.
Full Content: SSRN
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Federal Competition Office to Scrutinize High Electricity Prices in Germany
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Mexican Lawmakers Advance Controversial Plan to Dissolve Independent Oversight Bodies
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Motorola Accuses UK of Antitrust Breach Over Terminated Emergency Services Contract
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Amazon Must Face Antitrust Case Over Alleged Monopoly Practices
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
US Appeals Court Blocks FCC’s Move to Reinstate Net Neutrality Rules
Jan 2, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand