We have three companies; all of these produce concrete tiles for the Italian market. Milan Roofing Tile Inc. has got a market share on the Italian market of 35 percent, Rome Tile Inc. a share of 25 percent and Turin Tile Inc. of 40 percent. Milan Roofing Tile Inc. made Turin Tile Inc. an offer to purchase Turin Tile’s business as a part of Milan Roofing Tile’s expansion strategy. If Turin Tile Inc. assents there would be an horizontal acquisition (both companies are active on the same market, both produce concrete tiles) with the consequence of a 75 percent share of the concrete tile market in Italy. Even if we include the market of shields and tiles which are produced of other materials they would have a high market share, because concrete tiles are the most used material for the roofs in Italy.
Table of Contents
1 The Facts of the Case
2 Article 81 and 82 EC
2.1 Article 81 EC
2.2 Article 82 EC
3 European Merger Control Regulation (EMCR)
3.1 The Function of the EMCR
3.2 Substantive review of the aquisition
3.2.1 The relevant market
3.2.2 The test of compatibility with the common market
4 Solution
Objectives and Topics
The essay aims to analyze a hypothetical corporate acquisition within the Italian concrete tile market under the framework of European competition law, specifically evaluating the applicability of Article 81 and 82 EC and the European Merger Control Regulation (EMCR).
- The competition-related implications of horizontal acquisitions between market competitors.
- Distinction between "ex post" and "ex ante" legal control mechanisms in EU competition law.
- Definition and determination of relevant product and geographic markets.
- Criteria for establishing a "Community Dimension" in merger control assessments.
Excerpt from the Book
3.1 The Function of the EMCR
The function of the EMCR is the “ex ante” control of mergers and acquisitions. The question is: Will the European Common Market be less competitive and consequently disadvantageous for the consumers or not after a certain merge or acquisition?.5 As well as in Article 82 EC the issue of the dominant position of a company as well as the compatibility with the European Common Market are in the focus of the EMCR.
Summary of Chapters
1 The Facts of the Case: This chapter outlines the market shares and the proposed acquisition between three companies producing concrete tiles in Italy.
2 Article 81 and 82 EC: This section examines whether the planned acquisition violates prohibitions against restrictive practices or the abuse of a dominant position under European Community law.
3 European Merger Control Regulation (EMCR): This chapter explains the legal function of the EMCR and details the substantive review process regarding market relevance and competition compatibility.
4 Solution: This final chapter concludes that the legality of the acquisition depends on insufficient data regarding the companies' total turnover and European-wide market shares.
Keywords
European Competition Law, EMCR, Article 81 EC, Article 82 EC, Horizontal Acquisition, Market Share, Dominant Position, Community Dimension, Relevant Market, Merger Control, European Common Market, Consumer Welfare, Concrete Tile Market, Ex Ante, Ex Post
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper examines the legal assessment of a hypothetical business acquisition between concrete tile manufacturers within the European Union competition law framework.
What are the central thematic fields discussed?
The work covers horizontal acquisitions, the definition of product and geographic markets, the concept of dominant positions, and the criteria for merger control.
What is the main research question or objective?
The objective is to determine whether the proposed acquisition of Turin Tile Inc. by Milan Roofing Tile Inc. is compatible with current EU competition regulations.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The author employs a case study method, applying theoretical legal provisions and regulations to a specific set of commercial facts.
What topics are covered in the main section?
The main section covers the analysis of Articles 81 and 82 EC, the application of the European Merger Control Regulation, and the evaluation of the relevant market.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include European Competition Law, EMCR, Horizontal Acquisition, Dominant Position, and Community Dimension.
Why is Article 82 EC considered an "ex post" mechanism in this case?
Article 82 typically applies to existing market behavior; since the acquisition is currently only a plan, it is considered an "ex ante" situation rather than an "ex post" one.
How is the "relevant market" defined in this study?
The relevant market is divided into a product market (concrete tiles and shingles) and a geographic market (Italy), based on interchangeability and consumer use.
What is required for an acquisition to reach a "Community Dimension"?
It requires specific turnover thresholds, such as a combined worldwide turnover exceeding 5 billion or specific aggregate turnover within at least three Member States.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Sarah Stolle (Autor:in), 2006, Case Study: European Competition Law, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/60555
