European Journal of Law and Economics

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 137–161 | Cite as

Dominance in the Tetra Pak Case: An Empirical Approach

  • AURORA GARCIA-GALLEGO
  • NIKOLAOS GEORGANTZIS

Abstract

The 1991 decision of the European Commission on the Tetra Pak case was based on information which seemed to prove the firm's anti-competitive behavior. The Tetra Pak case is investigated here focusing on the meaning of multimarket dominance, using empirical techniques. We find that a more rigorous analysis of the data available would not confirm the Commission's assertions. That is, it cannot be concluded with certainty that the Commission was right to relate Tetra Pak's dominance in the aseptic sector to its market power in the non-aseptic sector. Our results suggest a general framework for the analysis of abusive transfer of market power across vertically or/and horizontally related markets.

Dominance related markets anti-competitive behavior 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baumol, W., Willig, R. and Panzar, J. (1982). Constestable Markets and the Theory of Industry Structure. San Diego: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Bresnahan, T.F. (1989). “Empirical Studies of Industries with Market Power.” Handbook of Industrial Organization. Willig, R.D. and Schmalensee, R. (eds), Amsterdam: North Holland Vol. II, ch. 17.Google Scholar
  3. Cellophane”. United States v. E.I. duPont de Nemours and Co., 351 US. 377 (1956).Google Scholar
  4. EC Commission. (1985). “Akzo” EC Commission Decision, O.J. L 374/1, (Case 62/86).Google Scholar
  5. EC Commission. (1988). “Tetra Pak I”, EC Commission Decision, O.J. L 272/27, 26 July.Google Scholar
  6. EC Commission. (1991). “Tetra Pak II”, EC Commission Decision, O.J. L 72/1, 24 July.Google Scholar
  7. García-Gallego, A. and Georgantzís, N. (1996). “Multiproduct Activity and Competition Policy: The Tetra Pak Case,” European Journal of Law and Economics 3,1, 81–93.Google Scholar
  8. George, K. (1990). “UK Competition Policy: Issues and Institutions.” in: Lesourne, J. and Sonnenschein, H. (eds), 'Competition Policy in Europe and North America: Economic Issues and Institutions', Chur: Harwood Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. George, K. and Jacquemin, A. (1990). “Competition Policy in the European Community.” in: Lesourne, J. and Sonnenschein, H. (eds), 'Competition Policy in Europe and North America: Economic Issues and Institutions', Chur: Harwood Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Geroski, P.A. and Jacquemin, A. (1984). “Dominant Firms and their Alleged Decline,” International Journal of Industrial Organization 2,1, 1–29.Google Scholar
  11. Glassman, M.L. (1980). “Market Definition as Practical Matter,” Antitrust Law Journal 49, Issue 3, 1155–1166.Google Scholar
  12. Greene, W.H. (1993). Econometric Analysis. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.Google Scholar
  13. Gyselen, L. (1990). “Abuse of Monopoly Power within the Meaning of Article 86 of the EEC Treaty: recent developments.” in: Barry Hawk (ed), 'Annual Proceedings of the Fordham Corporate Law 1992 and EEC/US Competition and Trade Law Ardsley-on-Hudson', New York: Transnational Juris Publications Incorporated.Google Scholar
  14. Hausman, J. (1978). “Specification Tests in Econometrics,” Econometrica 46, 1251–71.Google Scholar
  15. 'Hoffmann-La Roche' v. EC Commission (Vitamins), Case 85/76, Judgment of 13 February 1979, 1979 ECR 461.Google Scholar
  16. Jenny, F. (1990). “French Competition Policy in Perspective.” in: Lesourne, J. and Sonnenschein, H. (ed), 'Competition Policy in Europe and North America: Economic Issues and Institutions', Chur: Harwood Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Kantzenbach, E. (1990). “Competition Policy in West Germany: A Comparison with the Antitrust Policy of the United States.” in: Lesourne, J. and Sonnenschein, H. (eds), 'Competition Policy in Europe and North America Issues and Institutions', Chur: Harwood Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Kauper, T. (1990). “Dominant Positions and their Abuse under Article 86.” in: Barry Hawk (ed), 'Annual Proceedings of the Fordham Corporate Law 1992 and EEC/US Competition and Trade Law Ardsley-on-Hudson', New York: Transnational Juris Publications Incorporated.Google Scholar
  19. Krugman, P. (1986). “Pricing to Market when the Exchange Rate Changes,” NBER Working Paper 1926.Google Scholar
  20. Martin, S. (1994). Industrial Economics: Economic Analysis and Public Policy. 2nd ed., chapters 3 and 4, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  21. Ordover, A. (1990). “Economic Foundations of Competition Policy.” in: Lesourne, J. and Sonnenschein, H. (eds), 'Competition Policy in Europe and North America: Economic Issues and Institutions', Chur: Harwood Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Röller, L.H. and Tombak, M.M. (1990). “Strategic Choice of Flexible Production Technologies and Welfare Implications.” The Journal of Industrial Economics 38,4, 417–431.Google Scholar
  23. Schaerr, G.C. (1985). “The Cellophane Fallacy and the Justice Department's Guidelines for Horizontal Mergers,” Yale Law Journal 94,3, 670–693.Google Scholar
  24. Scherer, F.M. (1980). Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. Rand McNally Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  25. Spencer, D. and Berk, K. (1981). “A Limited Information Specification Test,', Econometrica 49, 1079–85.Google Scholar
  26. Steiner, P.O. (1968). “Markets and Industries.” in: International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, David L. Sills (ed), Macmillan Co. and the Free Press, 9, 575–581.Google Scholar
  27. Turner, D.F. (1980). “The Role of the Market Concept in Antitrust Law,” Antitrust Law Journal 49, Issue 3, 1145–1154.Google Scholar
  28. 'United Brands' v. EC Commission, Case 27/76, Judgment of 14 February 1978, 1978 ECR 207.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • AURORA GARCIA-GALLEGO
    • 1
  • NIKOLAOS GEORGANTZIS
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de EconomUniversitat Jaume ICastellon(Spain)

Personalised recommendations