...
In her opinion on British Airway v. Commission[6], General Advocate Kokott has raised the two-stage test to establish competitive disadvantage.[7] This two-stage test requires: First, a competitive relationship between the dominant company’s trading parties should be established. Secondly, a negative impact on these trading parties’ competitive position deriving from the discriminatory conduct should be determined.[8] However, in practice the Commission and the Court skips or briefly addresses on the assessment in the actual or potential competitive status among the trading parties, but assesses in detail the unlawful practice’s impact on the trading parties’ market positions.[9]
| Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
Responsible: Freie Universität Berlin, by its President |
[1] Robert O'donoghue and A. Jorge Padilla, The Law and Economics of Article 102 TFEU (2nd edn, Hart Publishing 2013) p. 789
[2] Case C-82/01 P, Aéroports de Paris v Commission [2002], ECR I-9297
[3] Case T-229/94, Deutsche Bahn v. Commission [1997], ECR II-1689
[4] Robert O'donoghue and A. Jorge Padilla, The Law and Economics of Article 102 TFEU (2nd edn, Hart Publishing 2013) p. 795
[5] Case 13/63, Italy v. Commission [1963], ECR 165, para. 6.
[6] Case T219/99, British Airway v. Commission [2003], ECR II-5917, para. 237, 238
[7] Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in T219/99, British Airway v. Commission [2003]. para. 121
[8] Anne Layne-farrar, Paul Stuart, Abusive Discrimination. in Francisco E. Gonzalez-diaz and Robbert Snelders (eds), Abuse of Dominance Under Article 102 TFEU (Claeys & Casteels 2013) para. 9.68
[9] Ibid., para. 9.69
