Ag Jacobs Case Summary

1112 Words5 Pages
CH3 Analysis In this section, I organize interpretation of laws of two Advocate General. Their opinions are sorted and compared together. and applied law and conflict in dispute from two cases: Syfait , and Sot. Lelos . I will see their opinion begin with harmony but end up with different perceptions. Interpretation of Laws Concerning abusive practice, AG Colomer holds “the closer the undertaking in a dominant position is to hindering competition in the market, the stronger the presumption of abuse”. In AG Colomer’s opinion, there are actually some practices which are considered as abusing dominant position per se. For example, exclusive purchase obligation, loyalty rebate, and predatory pricing; yet, not all anti-competitive behavior should be seen as abusive. But even before the…show more content…
For them, justification of parallel trade should be granted in a limited situation, but AG Jacobs didn’t think it the same; instead, AG Jacobs gave three factors in his opinion should be considered . First, AG Jacobs mentioned pharmaceutical industry is different from other industries in E.U. Because in pharmaceutical industry, it is member states that regulate the price of medicinal product rather the market. Borrowing from the commission’s suggestion , AG Jacobs points out it would be extremely difficult to even form a single regulated medicinal market within E.U. Second, competition doesn’t prevail from regulation at both national and union level. It is member state who ensure the adequate supply of medicinal products in their own territory . If a member state impose a very low price, undertakings have no space to disobey. As a consequence, since it is member state who engage in setting differential prices instead of market, and it is also member state themselves who purchase the product instead of end-users, it is hard to say parallel trade can really bring competition and drop of
Open Document