IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jcomle/v18y2022i2p323-399..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prometheus Bound?—The Uncertain Future Of The Unilateral Effects Analysis In Eu Merger Control After Ck Telecoms

Author

Listed:
  • Elias Deutscher

Abstract

In the recent CK Telecoms (Case T-399/16) judgment, the General Court annulled the European Commission’s decision to block the four-to-three telecom merger Hutchison3G UK/Telefónica UK. This watershed case is set to curtail the Commission’s ability to challenge future mergers in concentrated markets and proposes a fundamental reshape of the analysis of unilateral effects in the absence of dominance. This article shows that CK Telecoms advances six propositions that form the foundation of a new frame of reference for the analysis of unilateral effects under the EU Merger Regulation. This new framework has been welcomed by commentators as a long-overdue recognition that ‘the law’ trumps the Commission’s administrative discretion and as a vindication of the ‘more economic approach’. Based on a thorough review of 15 years of merger enforcement in the mobile telecommunication sector, this article challenges this account by debunking both the ‘rule of law’ and the ‘more economic approach’ arguments in support of the new framework. It instead demonstrates that each of the six principles advanced by CK Telecoms neither constitutes a reaffirmation of ‘the law’, nor aligns EU merger enforcement with the economic analysis of unilateral effects. In critically reflecting on the new framework laid down in CK Telecoms, this article formulates a number of policy proposals as building blocks for an alternative frame of reference that would preserve the effectiveness of EU merger enforcement in future unilateral effects cases while enhancing legal certainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Elias Deutscher, 2022. "Prometheus Bound?—The Uncertain Future Of The Unilateral Effects Analysis In Eu Merger Control After Ck Telecoms," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 323-399.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:18:y:2022:i:2:p:323-399.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/joclec/nhab012
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jcomle:v:18:y:2022:i:2:p:323-399.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcle .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.