{"title":"HOW PASS-ON THEORY SHOULD BE APPLIED IN KOREAN ANTITRUST LITIGATION","authors":"Se-In Lee","doi":"10.1093/joclec/nhw007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/joclec/nhw007","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I analyze and support the Korean Supreme Court's acceptance of pass-on theory in the recent flour price-fixing case decided in 2012. Since Korea belongs to the civil law system that aims at making actual damage compensation by private litigation, I agree with the court that a defendant should not be required to pay more than the actual damage suffered by plaintiffs. The Supreme Court stated that a defendant should establish a causal link between the alleged overcharge and any recovery made to plaintiffs through pass-on, but concluded that the required causal link was not established in the present flour price-fixing case. However, a notable feature of the judgment was that the Supreme Court allowed a reduction of the final damages awarded anyway, not on the basis of pass-on theory, but based on the notion of fairness. I support the Korean Supreme Court's decision to allow the pass-on defense to run, with burden of proof to establish it resting on the defendant. However, I suggest that the Korean courts should not calculate a reduction of damages according to the notion of fairness when a defendant cannot establish the pass-on causal link. It is time for the Korean courts to rely on a more concrete way of calculating damages than selecting some arbitrary numbers based on the notion of fairness.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132737821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"THE UNCERTAIN WELFARE EFFECTS OF RAILROAD COMPETITION AND RAILROAD REGULATION, 1870–1900","authors":"G. Priest","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHW012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHW012","url":null,"abstract":"This essay, written for a memorial contribution on the works of Paul W. MacAvoy, discusses MacAvoy's first book, The Economic Effects of Regulation (1965), which addresses eastern railroad cartels in the United States between 1870 and 1900. The essay describes the many achievements of this book in terms of detecting and measuring cheating on cartel prices and its discussion of cartel practices of greater or lesser success. The essay also compares railroad practices for chiefly the transport of grain from Chicago to New York to practices over the same period for the transport of refined oil from Pittsburgh and Cleveland to various locations on the east coast. The principal difference as between grain and oil transport was the existence of competitive markets for grain shipment versus the monopsony of the Standard Oil Company over the shipment of refined oil. The net welfare effects of the grain cartels versus the oil monopsony remain unclear.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128704275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"ARTICLE 101 TFEU AND MARKET INTEGRATION","authors":"Pablo Ibáñez Colomo","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2747784","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2747784","url":null,"abstract":"Market integration is an objective of Article 101 TFEU. As a result, agreements aimed at partitioning national markets are in principle restrictive of competition by object. The case law on this point has been consistent since Consten-Grundig. Making sense of it, however, remains a challenge. The purpose of this piece is to show, first, how the methodological approach followed by the Court of Justice changes when market integration considerations are at stake. Secondly, it explains why and when restrictions on cross-border trade have been found not to restrict competition by object within the meaning of Article 101(1) TFEU. An agreement aimed at partitioning national markets is not as such contrary to Article 101(1) TFEU if the analysis of the counterfactual reveals that it does not restrict inter-brand and/or intra-brand competition that would have existed in its absence. It is possible to think of three scenarios in this regard: (i) an agreement may be objectively necessary to achieve the aims sought by the parties; (ii) a clause may be objectively necessary for an agreement and (iii) competition is precluded by the underlying regulatory context (as is the case, in particular, when the exercise of intellectual property rights is at stake).","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129728308","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"MODELING THE DURATION OF MERGER REVIEWS IN NEW ZEALAND","authors":"Q. Yang, M. Pickford","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV038","url":null,"abstract":"The limited evidence on the speed of processing merger reviews by competition agencies shows that the time taken varies widely between cases. In this article, we explore which factors influence the duration of merger reviews by applying multivariate duration analysis to a dataset of 130 merger decisions made by the New Zealand Commerce Commission between 2001 and 2010. Our results suggest that a range of factors influence duration, including (1) the nature of the decision, and especially whether the application is declined, (2) the size of the application, (3) the potential impact on competition, measured by market concentration and barrier to entry height, (4) the complexity of the economic analysis, and (5) the Commission's merger workload. We use a competing-risks model that reflects the three alternative decisions available to the Commission (clear at stage 1, clear at stage 2, and decline). We find that the influence of some of these factors varies greatly between decision types and that declined decisions take much longer on average, probably because declines can lead to an appeal to the High Court by disappointed applicants.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"143 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122121953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE OF CONSUMER RESPONSE IN REGULATED MARKETS","authors":"C. Price, Minyan Zhu","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV041","url":null,"abstract":"The U.K. Competition and Markets Authority has opened two major investigations into the retail energy and banking sectors, and identifies weak consumer response as a potential theory of harm in both sectors. Consumers of many regulated services, including energy and banking, need to make active moves to switch suppliers, with profound consequences for how well the market functions. We identify differences in expected gains across demographic groups, particularly with respect to age and income, the associated changes in activity and implications for policy. We find that potential gains and anticipated switching time are associated with changes in consumer activity, but with differences between markets, demographic groups and individuals. Rather than concentrate on the average consumer response, we find variations across demographic groups, and that well informed vulnerable consumers are not necessarily less responsive than others, once we control for their expectations.We conclude that sector regulators and agencies who wish to encourage consumer action need to differentiate their policies: strategies to emphasize potential gains and reduce anticipated switching time are the most likely to increase consumer activity, but programs need to be tailored to particular markets and target groups if they are to be effective in stimulating consumer activity.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"18 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114035800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"DETERRING BIDDER COLLUSION: AUCTION DESIGN COMPLEMENTS ANTITRUST POLICY","authors":"Hong Wang, Hong-min Chen","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV037","url":null,"abstract":"Bidder collusion is a serious problem in many auction markets and is generally illegal in the U.S., the EU, China, and many other countries. Such collusion can limit competition and decrease the revenue obtained by the seller (or buyer in the case of procurement) and distort the efficiency of the final allocation. This article provides an elementary, non-technical survey of theoretical and empirical research on bidder collusion with an emphasis on identifying factors that facilitate or inhibit collusive schemes as well as circumstances where detection is possible and an auctioneer's best response to bid rigging. The results of existing literature show that good auction design complements antitrust enforcement, and both play a role in deterring bidder collusion.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126078976","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"ADDING DIMENSION TO MERGER ANALYSIS","authors":"Mark A. Jamison, J. Hauge","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV039","url":null,"abstract":"Traditional merger analysis in the U.S. focuses on a single dimension: namely, the combination of two or more firms that supply substitutable products. Thus, merger analysis misses the fact that there are various types of mergers—for example, hostile takeovers, friendly acquisitions, and mergers of equals—and that the differences among these types affect outcomes. Similarly absent is explicit consideration of merger-created synergies for future markets. We illustrate the effects of painting all mergers with the same brush on the propensity for firms to form beneficial mergers and we suggest means of changing merger analysis to reflect diversity in the natures of mergers and their future markets.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134290439","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"THE EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE ON DAMAGES ACTIONS: A MISSED OPPORTUNITY TO RECONCILE COMPENSATION OF VICTIMS AND LENIENCY INCENTIVES","authors":"Philipp Kirst, R. V. D. Bergh","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV033","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV033","url":null,"abstract":"In this article we analyze the effects of the recent European Directive on rules governing actions for damages under national law for competition law infringements on an effective leniency program from deterrence and compensatory justice perspectives. We show that the Directive resolves the uncertainty following the Pfleiderer and subsequent judgments on a national and EU level, but creates new uncertainties by introducing provisions in order to protect either leniency incentives or victims’ right of compensation. We argue that an alternative solution could have been chosen, according to which cooperating undertakings that have received immunity or reduction from fines would be granted the same protection against damages liability. Following this alternative solution, the non-cooperating members of the cartel would then have to compensate the victims for the harm caused by the cartel. We show that, under certain conditions, this alternative is a superior approach to resolve the conflict between optimal leniency incentives and compensation for all victims.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130046134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Margin Squeeze: An Above-Cost Predatory Pricing Approach","authors":"Germain Gaudin, Despoina Mantzari","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV042","url":null,"abstract":"We provide a new legal perspective for the antitrust analysis of margin squeeze conducts. Building on recent economic analysis, we explain why margin squeeze conducts should solely be evaluated under adjusted predatory pricing standards. The adjustment corresponds to an increase in the cost benchmark used in the predatory pricing test by including opportunity costs due to missed upstream sales. This can reduce both the risks of false-positives and false-negatives in margin squeeze cases. We justify this approach by explaining why classic arguments against above-cost predatory pricing typically do not hold in vertical structures where margin squeezes take place and by presenting case law evidence supporting this adjustment. Our approach can help to reconcile the divergent US and EU antitrust stances on margin squeeze.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128428832","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"ONE PIECE AT A TIME: SUCCESSIVE MONOPOLY AND TYING IN ANTITRUST","authors":"Fred S. McChesney","doi":"10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JOCLEC/NHV034","url":null,"abstract":"As highlighted by the linkLine case, litigation alleging anticompetitive price squeezes due to a defendant's successive monopoly remains the recurring feature in antitrust that it has been since Alcoa. Some decisions, notably then-Judge Breyer's Town of Concord opinion, treat the matter as one of economics. Others, such as linkLine and similar appellate court decisions, resolve the matter on narrower legal grounds. This article revisits the Concord opinion's economics, correcting small errors in Judge Breyer's graphical analysis but reaffirming his principal economic point that successive monopoly ordinarily is procompetitive and may well benefit consumers. Decisions upholding price squeezes in a successive monopoly on purely legal grounds are therefore economically correct. The article then argues that the economics of successive monopoly offer an economically sound extrication from the morass in which tying law currently wallows. The economic differences between successive monopoly and tying are inconsequential. So the law governing the two practices (section 2 of the Sherman Act for successive monopoly, section 1 of the Sherman Act and section 3 of the Clayton Act for tying) should be reduced to a single set of standards. Parallels to the economics and law of exclusive dealing are also noted as part of the case for legal unification.","PeriodicalId":399709,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Competition Law and Economics","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115828095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}