Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/53655
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-04-03T14:11:23Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-04-03T14:11:23Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Buhagiar, C. K. (2019). The element of indispensability in margin squeeze: is it a must? (Bachelor's dissertation). | en_GB |
dc.identifier.uri | https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/53655 | - |
dc.description | LL.B. | en_GB |
dc.description.abstract | A margin squeeze occurs whenever a vertically integrated undertaking dominant on the upstream market for an input sells that input to its downstream competitor at a price which does not allow it to operate profitably. Initially, margin squeeze was considered a constructive refusal to supply and as such acquired an abusive character if and only if the Bronner criteria, including the indispensability element, were met. In 2010, the Court of Justice departed from this original stance, affirming that margin squeeze constitutes a self-standing abuse. At first, the indispensability element retained its mandatory status, however was eventually reduced to a non-essential requirement. This dissertation deeply analyses whether indispensability should constitute an essential pre-requisite for the stand-alone abuse of margin squeeze. Chapter 1 examines the evolution of margin squeeze under European Union law with particular attention being made to the indispensability requirement. The chapter begins by exploring the earliest decisions and judgements related to margin squeeze. Thereafter it examines the Commission Guidance Paper which reflects the aforementioned original position as well as contemporary jurisprudence which led to the current broad margin squeeze approach. Chapter 2 thoroughly scrutinises the significance of indispensability within the context of margin squeeze. Amongst other matters, it looks at the economics of margin squeeze, examines the effects of rendering indispensability non-essential and determines whether this decision truly promotes the effectiveness of Article 102 TFEU. The conclusion of this dissertation draws together all the arguments made in the foregoing chapters and determines whether the element of indispensability is a must within the context of the stand-alone abuse of margin squeeze. | en_GB |
dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess | en_GB |
dc.subject | Competition, Unfair -- European Union countries | en_GB |
dc.subject | Antitrust law -- European Union countries | en_GB |
dc.subject | Restraint of trade -- European Union countries | en_GB |
dc.subject | Monopolies -- European Union countries | en_GB |
dc.title | The element of indispensability in margin squeeze : is it a must? | en_GB |
dc.type | bachelorThesis | en_GB |
dc.rights.holder | The copyright of this work belongs to the author(s)/publisher. The rights of this work are as defined by the appropriate Copyright Legislation or as modified by any successive legislation. Users may access this work and can make use of the information contained in accordance with the Copyright Legislation provided that the author must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the prior permission of the copyright holder. | en_GB |
dc.publisher.institution | University of Malta | en_GB |
dc.publisher.department | Faculty of Laws | en_GB |
dc.description.reviewed | N/A | en_GB |
dc.contributor.creator | Buhagiar, Christopher Klement | - |
Appears in Collections: | Dissertations - FacLaw - 2019 |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
19LLB027.pdf Restricted Access | 854.13 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
Items in OAR@UM are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.