IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/recjxx/v16y2020i2-3p368-386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The elusive test for unfair excessive pricing under EU law: revisiting United Brands in the light of Competition and Markets Authority v Flynn Pharma Ltd

Author

Listed:
  • Grant Stirling

Abstract

The European Commission has historically proved relatively reluctant to intervene in the area of excessive pricing. This is probably partly because the test outlined in United Brands v Commission remains unclear in various respects. In a recent decision of the English Court of Appeal – Competition and Markets Authority v Flynn Pharma – the English court sought to revisit some of the problematic aspects of the United Brands test. While the decision places a useful light on the intrinsic problems with the test, it is argued that in certain respects the Court of Appeal's reading is questionable and that significant uncertainties remain. In particular, the questions of what qualifies a price as being “unfair in itself” and how the economic value of a product should be assessed remain problematic. Until these issues are addressed more thoroughly by the EU courts, the enforcement of unfair excessive pricing will continue to prove problematic.

Suggested Citation

  • Grant Stirling, 2020. "The elusive test for unfair excessive pricing under EU law: revisiting United Brands in the light of Competition and Markets Authority v Flynn Pharma Ltd," European Competition Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(2-3), pages 368-386, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:recjxx:v:16:y:2020:i:2-3:p:368-386
    DOI: 10.1080/17441056.2020.1771007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17441056.2020.1771007
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17441056.2020.1771007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:taf:recjxx:v:16:y:2020:i:2-3:p:368-386. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/recj .

    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.