What to consider restrictive by object?

Publikation: AndetAndet bidragFormidling

Standard

What to consider restrictive by object? / Bergqvist, Christian.

2020.

Publikation: AndetAndet bidragFormidling

Harvard

Bergqvist, C 2020, What to consider restrictive by object?..

APA

Bergqvist, C. (2020, nov. 13). What to consider restrictive by object?

Vancouver

Bergqvist C. What to consider restrictive by object? 2020.

Author

Bergqvist, Christian. / What to consider restrictive by object?. 2020.

Bibtex

@misc{7de0a549b36a4b05898d83a1410849a6,
title = "What to consider restrictive by object?",
abstract = "What to consider a restriction of competition under Article 101 (1) is complex. However, the text of Article 101 (1) refers to agreements that are anti-competitive by object or by effect. A segregation utilized in early cases such as Consten and Grundig and Soci{\'e}t{\'e} Technique Mini{\`e}re. Both from 1966 and both involving the appraisal under Article 101 (1) of exclusive distribution agreements. In the first, the parties had attempted to (ab)use an exclusive distribution agreement to prevent parallel imports from outside the allotted territory, which was detrimental to the object of Article 101 (1). In the latter, the Court of Justice stated that restriction by object or effect was not cumulative, but two alternative ways of analyzing potential restrictions.",
author = "Christian Bergqvist",
year = "2020",
month = nov,
day = "13",
language = "English",
type = "Other",

}

RIS

TY - GEN

T1 - What to consider restrictive by object?

AU - Bergqvist, Christian

PY - 2020/11/13

Y1 - 2020/11/13

N2 - What to consider a restriction of competition under Article 101 (1) is complex. However, the text of Article 101 (1) refers to agreements that are anti-competitive by object or by effect. A segregation utilized in early cases such as Consten and Grundig and Société Technique Minière. Both from 1966 and both involving the appraisal under Article 101 (1) of exclusive distribution agreements. In the first, the parties had attempted to (ab)use an exclusive distribution agreement to prevent parallel imports from outside the allotted territory, which was detrimental to the object of Article 101 (1). In the latter, the Court of Justice stated that restriction by object or effect was not cumulative, but two alternative ways of analyzing potential restrictions.

AB - What to consider a restriction of competition under Article 101 (1) is complex. However, the text of Article 101 (1) refers to agreements that are anti-competitive by object or by effect. A segregation utilized in early cases such as Consten and Grundig and Société Technique Minière. Both from 1966 and both involving the appraisal under Article 101 (1) of exclusive distribution agreements. In the first, the parties had attempted to (ab)use an exclusive distribution agreement to prevent parallel imports from outside the allotted territory, which was detrimental to the object of Article 101 (1). In the latter, the Court of Justice stated that restriction by object or effect was not cumulative, but two alternative ways of analyzing potential restrictions.

UR - http://competitionlawblog.kluwercompetitionlaw.com/2020/11/13/what-to-consider-restrictive-by-object/

M3 - Other contribution

ER -

ID: 253651589