|
|
| (119 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| [[Belarus_December_2002]]
| | == Saudia Arabia 2004 - Tying or discriminatory pricing == |
|
| |
|
| '''RTP - Efficiency Defense.''' | | ''What do we think about this one?'' |
|
| |
|
| ''I think the following counts as an efficiency defense to RTP.''
| | imposing certain conditions on selling and purchasing transactions or on dealing with another firm, in a manner that puts it in a weak competitive position compared to other competing firms. |
|
| |
|
| 6(3) - "3. In exceptional cases, agreements (coordinated actions) between economic entities as stipulated by the present Article, excluding those listed in clause 1 of the present Article, may be considered legally valid by anti-monopoly body in compliance with the procedure sets up by the President of the Republic of Belarus, or by any other state body or court authorized by the President, provided the economic entities prove that economic effect of their actions, including social and economic sectors, will exceed negative consequences for the given commodity market or the Republic of Belarus as a whole, and competition must only be restricted to the extent wherein the above restrictions are inevitable for the achievement of the given economic effect, or directly stipulated by legislative acts adopted (issued) in according with the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus."
| | --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 15:18, 31 July 2007 (EDT) |
|
| |
|
| --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 10:38, 21 June 2007 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| I agree, looks like an efficiency defense.
| |
|
| |
|
| --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 11:04, 21 June 2007 (EDT) | | == Saudi Arabia 2004 - Eliminating Competitors == |
|
| |
|
| | ''Count it?'' |
|
| |
|
| ---- | | Article 4(4) - Preventing any firm from exercising its right to enter or move out of the market at any time or hampering the same. |
|
| |
|
| '''Merger Efficiency Defense'''
| | --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 15:30, 31 July 2007 (EDT) |
| | |
| ''Looks like a merger efficiency defense to me (see 28(2))''
| |
| | |
| Authorisation for Concentration
| |
| | |
| Article 28. (1) (Amended, SG No. 9/2003) The Commission shall authorise the concentration provided that the latter does not result in the creation or strengthening of a dominant position that would significantly impede effective competition on the market concerned.
| |
| (2) (Amended, SG No. 9/2003) The Commission may authorise a concentration which, although creating or strengthening a dominant position, aims at modernisation of production or of the economy as a whole, improvement of the market structures, attraction of investments, creation of new jobs, better satisfying of the interests of the consumers, and as a whole outweighs the negative impact on competition on the market concerned.
| |
| (3) (Amended, SG No. 9/2003) The Commission may include in the authorisation referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) additional restrictive requirements which are directly related to the implementation of the concentration and are needed for the preservation of the effective competition or the overall positive impact on the market concerned.
| |
| | |
| | |
| --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 11:08, 21 June 2007 (EDT) | |
| | |
| | |
| ----
| |
Saudia Arabia 2004 - Tying or discriminatory pricing
What do we think about this one?
imposing certain conditions on selling and purchasing transactions or on dealing with another firm, in a manner that puts it in a weak competitive position compared to other competing firms.
--JWSchneider 15:18, 31 July 2007 (EDT)
Saudi Arabia 2004 - Eliminating Competitors
Count it?
Article 4(4) - Preventing any firm from exercising its right to enter or move out of the market at any time or hampering the same.
--JWSchneider 15:30, 31 July 2007 (EDT)