User talk:Kajrozga

Test (Date) Section

Question

Text

--Kajrozga 11:12, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Cyprus (1999)

1.)

42.-(1) Where the Commission exercises the powers granted under section 41 and subject to the provisions of section 47, it may, following a study of the relevant reports of the Service, order the dissolution or partial dissolution of a concentration, in order to secure the restoration of the competitive market.

Divestiture = 1 ???

Agreed, this is divestiture. --JWSchneider 15:06, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Hylton: Agreed.

2.)

4.—(1) Any enterprise agreement having as its object or effect the elimination, restriction or distortion of competition, in particular an agreement which— . . .

RTP: Eliminating Competitors = 1 ???

--Kajrozga 11:46, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. This is eliminating competitors. --JWSchneider 15:06, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Hylton: Agreed.

Czech Republic (2004)

1.)

Article 18

Suspension of implementation of concentrations

(2) Where the Office finds that the undertakings have implemented the concentration without notification of the concentration, it may impose on the undertakings a duty to sell the interests, transfer the enterprise acquired by the concentration or a part thereof, terminate an agreement or take any other measures that may be necessary for restoring effective competition in the relevant market.

Divestiture = 1????

--Kajrozga 11:57, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Sounds a whole lot like divestiture, and certainly keeps it general enough that the admin bodies might impose it. This is a question for Hylton, I think.

--JWSchneider 15:14, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Hylton: Agreed.

Cote d'Ivoire (1991)

From a secondary source: SECTION 2: DESCRIPTION OF PRACTICES, ACTIONS AND BEHAVIOUR SUBJECT TO REVIEW

Ivorian legislation distinguishes between practices which result from individual behaviour (restrictive practices) and those which arise from concerted actions (anti-competitive practices).

1. CONCERTED OR ANTI-COMPETITIVE PRACTICES There is a blanket ban on these practices, but exemption may be granted under article 10 in the case of those which arise from the application of a law or regulation or which would generate economic progress for the community as a whole

---Question 1: Seems like this Article 10 efficiency defense only applies to RTPs. Is that how you guys would read it?---

Since this is a secondary source, I'd just interpret it as narrowly as possible. --JWSchneider 15:23, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

1.1. Agreements (article 7 L) Article 7 defines agreements as accords, concerted practices and decisions to associate or collective recommendations emanating from natural or legal persons, public or private.

This article prohibits any concerted action, agreement, alliance or arrangement, express or tacit, which has the purpose of or may have the effect of hampering or limiting free competition, in particular when the action tends to: . . .

---Question 2: RTP: Eliminating Competitors = 1  ????---

--Kajrozga 13:15, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Def a question for Hylton. Funny how they say "we define agreements as accords." Kind of redundant. --JWSchneider 15:23, 25 June 2007 (EDT)

Hylton: AGREED.

Chile (1973)

Found the primary source on Chile, this is gonna be a bloodbath...

1.)

"Anyone executing or going into individually or collectively any fact, act or convention tending to impede free-competition within the country in economic activities, both in that of internal character and concerning external trade activities, shall be punished with petty imprisonment in any of its degrees."

Question: Extraterritoriality? Question: Too broad to tabulate "Restriction of Competition" under Mergers?

2.)

"To the effects provided in the foregoing article, it will be considered among others, as facts, acts or conventions tending to impede free-competition, the following:

"a. Those referred to production, such as quota distribution, reductions or stagnation of them;" b. Those referred to commerce or distribution, whether wholesaler or retailer, such as quota distribution . . . "

Question: Hylton said qoutas are going under "limits access" under Dominance, correct?

"c. Those referred to commerce or distribution, whether wholesaler or retailer, such as quota distribution or the assignment of market zones or exclusive distribution by a sole person or entity, of a same article of several producers;"

Question: Market Division = 1 ?

"f. Generally, any other measure tending to eliminate, restrict or hindering free-competition."

Question: Eliminating Competitors = 1 ?

"[Empowers a commission to:] 2. To order the modification or dissolution of the companies, corporations and other juridical persons of private law, that have been a party in such acts, contracts, covenants, systems or agreements referred to in the foregoing number; 4. To impose fines for the benefit of the Government up to an amount equivalent to ten thousand tributary units. The fines shall be judiciously regulated according to the working capital or"

Question: Divestiture = 1 ?

[Speaking about monopolies:] "Notwithstanding, the execution or the maintenance of those acts or contracts referred to in the foregoing articles could be authorized, provided that the national interest may require it and that they are necessary for the stability or development of national investments"

Question: Efficiency Defense = 1 ?

--Kajrozga 12:49, 26 June 2007 (EDT)