Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Abuse of joint dominance in Canadian competition policy
by
Iacobucci, Edward M
, Winter, Ralph A
in
Antitrust law
/ Antitrust laws
/ Competition
/ Competition Act-Canada
/ Contracts
/ Direct costing
/ Market economies
/ Oligopolies
/ Oligopoly
2010
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Abuse of joint dominance in Canadian competition policy
by
Iacobucci, Edward M
, Winter, Ralph A
in
Antitrust law
/ Antitrust laws
/ Competition
/ Competition Act-Canada
/ Contracts
/ Direct costing
/ Market economies
/ Oligopolies
/ Oligopoly
2010
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Abuse of joint dominance in Canadian competition policy
2010
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
The Canadian Competition Bureau has recently offered new draft guidelines on the abuse of dominance that, in the area of joint dominance, depart from the existing guidelines in two ways: first, the bureau no longer considers as a potential abuse of joint dominance the adoption of practices that facilitate supra-competitive pricing in an oligopoly; second, while in the past some form of explicit coordination was required for an assessment of joint dominance, the bureau now considers parallel abusive conduct by jointly dominant firms as potentially infringing the abuse provisions. The first change, which we attribute to case law rather than to the bureau, is undesirable. The adoption of facilitating practices can lessen competition, and is practically remediable. Facilitating practices should be considered potential abuses of joint dominance. On the other hand, the second change is sensible: oligopolists may profitably adopt exclusionary practices in parallel without coordination. Parallel exclusionary practices may lessen competition even when no single firm has a dominant market share, and this problem is amenable to a practical remedy. The bureau's new approach is welcome on this front.
Publisher
University of Toronto Press
Subject
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.