Unmasking Excessive Pricing: Evolution of EU Law on Excessive Pricing from United Brands to Aspen

Article


Marinova, M. 2024. Unmasking Excessive Pricing: Evolution of EU Law on Excessive Pricing from United Brands to Aspen. European Competition Journal. 20 (2), pp. 315-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441056.2023.2280329
AuthorsMarinova, M.
Abstract

It has been argued that the test for excessive pricing set out in United Brands is vague in a number of aspects and subsequent judgments of the EU courts have not provided much clarity on the matter. This article examines the evolution of the EU case law on excessive pricing for the last four decades including the most recent excessive pricing case investigated by the European Commission in the Aspen case. In particular, the article discusses the important question of what constitutes an excessive price that is “unfair in itself” and the question of how economic value is to be assessed. The article concludes that, although the abuse of unfair excessive pricing is likely to remain a difficult area for regulators to handle, the Commission’s commitment decision in Aspen, despite the fact that it cannot change or replace judicial decisions, provides very important clarification of the legal test for excessive pricing.

Keywordscompetition law; abuse of dominance; excessive pricing; unfairness
JournalEuropean Competition Journal
Journal citation20 (2), pp. 315-339
ISSN1744-1056
1757-8396
Year2024
PublisherTaylor & Francis (Routledge)
Publisher's version
License
File Access Level
Anyone
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org/10.1080/17441056.2023.2280329
Publication dates
Online15 Nov 2023
Publication process dates
Accepted01 Sep 2023
Deposited08 Mar 2024
Copyright holder© 2023, The Author
Permalink -

https://repository.uel.ac.uk/item/8x0w1

Download files

  • 79
    total views
  • 39
    total downloads
  • 2
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month

Export as

Related outputs

The UK’s digital market regulation: the need for a proportionality principle in the CMA’s new framework
Marinova, M. 2024. The UK’s digital market regulation: the need for a proportionality principle in the CMA’s new framework. Journal of European Competition Law & Practice. p. In Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeclap/lpae062
Rethinking the ‘as efficient competitor’ test: assessing the wider impact of the CJEU’s judgment in Unilever Italia and its implications in shaping the European Commission’s agenda to reform Article 102 TFEU
Marinova, M. 2024. Rethinking the ‘as efficient competitor’ test: assessing the wider impact of the CJEU’s judgment in Unilever Italia and its implications in shaping the European Commission’s agenda to reform Article 102 TFEU. Competition Law Journal. 23 (1), p. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.4337/clj.2024.01.01
Navigating the Crossroads: The Future of Efficient Competitor Test in EU Competition Law
Marinova, M. 2024. Navigating the Crossroads: The Future of Efficient Competitor Test in EU Competition Law. ThoughtLeaders4 Competition Magazine. 5, pp. 40-41.
Rethinking the legal test for excessive pricing: Insights from the Landmark UK CMA v Pfizer/Flynn Case and Its Legal Implications
Marinova, M. 2024. Rethinking the legal test for excessive pricing: Insights from the Landmark UK CMA v Pfizer/Flynn Case and Its Legal Implications. Journal of Antitrust Enforcement. p. In Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnae033
Evolution of the legal test on excessive pricing in the UK
Marinova, M. 2023. Evolution of the legal test on excessive pricing in the UK. ThoughtLeaders4 Competition Magazine. 3, pp. 58-59.
Should the rejection of the “as efficient competitor” test in the Intel and Post Danmark II judgements lead to dismissal of the effect-based approach?
Marinova, M. 2016. Should the rejection of the “as efficient competitor” test in the Intel and Post Danmark II judgements lead to dismissal of the effect-based approach? European Competition Journal. 12 (2-3), pp. 387-408. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441056.2017.1289706