|
|
| (70 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | == Saudia Arabia 2004 - Tying or discriminatory pricing == |
|
| |
|
| == Jordan 2004 - RTP - Tying ==
| | ''What do we think about this one?'' |
|
| |
|
| ''It's tying under dominance, but do we mark it under 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(G) - G- Tying the sale of a product or the provision of a service to the purchase of another or others or the purchase of a limited amount or a request for the provision of another service.
| | --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 15:18, 31 July 2007 (EDT) |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| Hylton: YES. --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 10:41, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| == Jordan 2004 - RTP - Supply Refusal == | | == Saudi Arabia 2004 - Eliminating Competitors == |
|
| |
|
| ''Again, under dominance. Does it count?'' | | ''Count it?'' |
|
| |
|
| 6(F) - F- Refusing, without objective grounds, to deal with a particular customer under the usual commercial conditions.
| | 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. |
|
| |
|
| | | --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 15:30, 31 July 2007 (EDT) |
| Hylton: Limiting access. --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 10:41, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| == Jordan 2004 - Efficiency Defenses for dominance and RTP ==
| |
| | |
| ''Efficiency defense?''
| |
| | |
| 7(B) and (C)
| |
| | |
| B- Practices and arrangements exempted by the Minister from the
| |
| application of Articles 5 and 6 of this Law by a reasoned decision
| |
| on the basis of a recommendation of the Director shall not be
| |
| considered anti-competitive if they lead to positive results, with a
| |
| common benefit that cannot be achieved without this exemption,
| |
| including the improvement of the competitive ability of
| |
| Enterprises, or production or distribution systems, or providing
| |
| certain benefits to the consumer.
| |
| | |
| C- The Minister may apply the exemptions referred to in paragraph
| |
| (B) above to a class of practices or conditions of contract or to
| |
| practices or arrangements or conditions of contract of particular
| |
| Enterprises, provided that such Enterprises shall request to be
| |
| granted this exemption in accordance with a form adopted by the
| |
| Minister for that purpose.
| |
| | |
| | |
| Agreed.--[[User:Kajrozga|Kajrozga]] 13:01, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| == Jordan 2004 - Merger Assessment - Dominance ==
| |
| | |
| ''Looks like only mergers that result in dominance are examined by the gov't''
| |
| | |
| 9(B) - The accomplishment of economic concentration operations
| |
| impacting the level of competition in the market by causing or
| |
| enforcing a '''Dominant Position shall depend upon receiving the
| |
| approval of the Minister in writing, if the total share of the
| |
| Enterprise or Enterprises concerned in the economic
| |
| concentration operation exceeds 40% of the total transactions in
| |
| the market'''.
| |
| | |
| Article 10
| |
| A- Enterprises wishing to carry out economic concentration
| |
| operations which fall within the ambit of '''paragraph (B) of Article
| |
| 9''' of this Law shall submit a petition in this regard to the
| |
| Directorate, on the form adopted by the Ministry, within thirty
| |
| days ...
| |
| | |
| Agreed. Definitely looks like market share of acquiring company is taken into account in merger assessment.
| |
| --[[User:Kajrozga|Kajrozga]] 13:00, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| == Jordan 2004 - Merger assessment ==
| |
| | |
| ''Do we have a public interest defense here??''
| |
| | |
| 11(A)- The Minister may, upon recommendation of the Director, issue a
| |
| reasoned decision regarding petitions submitted by virtue of the
| |
| provisions of Article 10 hereof as follows:
| |
| | |
| 1- Approve the economic concentration operation if it does
| |
| not negatively impact competition, or has positive
| |
| economic benefits that outweigh any negative impact on
| |
| competition, such as l'''eading to a lowering of the price
| |
| of services or products''', or '''providing employment
| |
| opportunities''', or encouraging exports or attracting
| |
| investment, or '''supporting the ability of national
| |
| Enterprises to compete internationally'''.
| |
| | |
| | |
| Hylton: Public interest (pro consumer) and efficiency. National champion goes under public interest (pro-D). --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 10:44, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| == Jamaica 2001 - 3rd party remedies ==
| |
| | |
| ''Does this count?''
| |
| | |
| 48. (1) Every person who engages in conduct which constitutes—
| |
| (a) a contravention of any of the obligations or prohibitions imposed in Parts III, IV, VI or VII;
| |
| (b) aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the contravention of any such provision;
| |
| (c) inducing by treats, promises, or otherwise the contravention of any such provision;
| |
| (d) being knowingly conceived in or party to any such contravention; or
| |
| (e) conspiring with any other person to contravene any such provision,
| |
| '''is liable in damages for any loss caused to any other person by such conduct'''.
| |
| (2) An action under subsection (1) may be commenced at any time within three years from the time when the cause of action arose.
| |
| | |
| I'd double check with hylton, though i agree with you.
| |
| --[[User:Kajrozga|Kajrozga]] 12:58, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| == Jersey, Channel Islands - Generally ==
| |
| | |
| This is not a recognized country by the US state department. It's an independent - non-European, non-British - nation, owned by the English Crown.
| |
| | |
| == Jersey, Channel Islands - Merger public interest defense ==
| |
| | |
| ''Efficiency? Public interest?''
| |
| | |
| 23 Exemption by Committee on grounds of public policy (Part 4)
| |
| (1) The Committee may, after consulting the Authority, exempt a merger or
| |
| acquisition of a type prescribed by an Order made under Article 20(3)
| |
| from the requirement that it be approved by the Authority before
| |
| execution.
| |
| '''(2) The Committee shall not do so unless it is has satisfied itself that there
| |
| are exceptional and compelling reasons of public policy that make it
| |
| desirable to do so.'''
| |
| (3) When, in accordance with paragraph (1), the Committee consults the
| |
| Authority on a proposed exemption –
| |
| (a) the Authority must publish the advice it gives to the Committee;
| |
| and
| |
| (b) the Committee must publish its reasons for granting or refusing to
| |
| grant the exemption, as the case may be.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:JWSchneider|JWSchneider]] 16:09, 11 July 2007 (EDT)
| |
| | |
| The rule we're using is default to efficiency defense unless the statute explicitly talks about "public interest", right? I think "public policy" is close enough to "public interest" to make this a public interest defense, but you should probably ask Hylton.
| |
| | |
| --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 09:27, 12 July 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)