Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Protección de la competencia en Chile: El Estado vs Laboratorios Chile y Recalcine (1992/93)

Contents:

Author Info

  • Edgardo Barandiarán
  • Ricardo Paredes

Abstract

Este trabajo analiza la denuncia contra Laboratorios Chile y Recalcine por concertación de precios de sus productos farmacéuticos genéricos. Al momento de la denuncia (1992) los dos laboratorios representaban el 82 por ciento del total de las ventas de esos productos en los mercados nacionales. El artículo analiza el proceso y las pruebas del caso para explicar las decisiones opuestas de la Comisión Preventiva y de la Comisión Resolutiva y evaluar si el sistema contribuye a la seguridad jurídica requerida para la libre competencia. En este caso, el proceso fracasó en generar pruebas adecuadas para una decisión fundamentada y las comisiones apreciaron las pocas pruebas con criterios distintos. En consecuencia, sus decisiones no contribuyeron a promover esa seguridad jurídica. No obstante, el análisis del caso es de utilidad para entender el funcionamiento del sistema de protección de la competencia.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.econ.uchile.cl/uploads/publicacion/a2972f23-8511-4e4f-8076-39abd61872c1.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Chile, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number wp191.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Jun 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:udc:wpaper:wp191

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.econ.uchile.cl/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Antitrust; collusion.;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 2002. "Preponderance of Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 725, CESifo Group Munich.
  2. F. M. Scherer, 1993. "Pricing, Profits, and Technological Progress in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 97-115, Summer.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:udc:wpaper:wp191. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Federico Huneeus).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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