THE IPEGs believe that, in many cases, licensing is pro-competitive because it facilitates the use of intellectual property rights by other parties. However, in order to assess whether a technology licensing agreement is anti-competitive, the Bureau would review the terms of the licence and whether they create, improve or maintain the market power of one of the parties. In general, the Bureau does not consider that “intellectual protection licensing agreements are anti-competitive unless they significantly reduce competition compared to what would likely have existed without the potentially anti-competitive conditions of the licence.” In several cases, IP licensing agreements have been processed. In Canada (Director of Investigation and Research) /Tele-Direct (Publications) Inc., for example, the Tribunal found that the application of trademark rights, including the refusal to grant a trademark license, even selective, was not an anti-competitive act within the meaning of Section 79(5) of the Act, since the Trademark Act gives trademark holders the right to exercise precisely those rights. Not necessarily, while competitors should be assured not to disclose competition information to each other in connection with such disclosures, either directly or through intermediaries such as HCPs. Companies involved in anti-competitive behaviour may consider their agreements to be unenforceable and may be fined up to 10% of the group`s global turnover and may suspend any action for damages. You can report anti-competitive activities if you see them. … there must be an effect of the purpose, effect or likely effect of the offending conduct on competition, which is important in the sense of a competition procedure that is important or relevant to the competition process. Article 102 imposes a dominant position in a substantial part of the EU, but it is not necessary, under Chapter II, for a dominant position to be represented in a substantial part of the United Kingdom, which means that one might assume, at least in theory, that there is a dominant position in a relatively small geographical area of the United Kingdom. Use our advanced search page to find a cartel case.
To see all the deals, select “Competition” in the field of mission. To view a particular type of competition case, choose from the list of topics available in the Competition Topics field. In return, Bank A`s competitors do not provide price information. However, they circulate internally on bank A`s price information. Bank A`s competitors know that there will be less competitive pressure on its credit prices. They are not trying to under-relegate Bank A, but to raise their interest rates in line with Bank A. Bank A sees the reaction of its competitors and this practice continues over time. Identifying a market and defining its dimensions is a “concentration process” that requires the choice of “what turns out to be the clearest picture of the relevant competition process in light of the commercial reality and the purposes of the law.” If so, the court will draw the necessary “meeting of minds” from evidence of joint action, similar price structures or even evidence of an agreement that would lead the parties to an agreement. For example, an agreement that would otherwise fall under Chapter 1 or Article 101 may be considered to be unsymiesued if the parties are not real or potential competitors or have market shares so small that there can be no real impact on competition or trade in the UK or between EU Member States. However, it is found that agreements considered to be aimed at, including cartel practices and abuse of dominance, are almost always contrary to competition rules, regardless of market share. Is an exchange of anti-competitive information in the pharmaceutical sector more likely, given the greater transparency imposed by measures such as disclosure