Online-resebyråers användning av prisparitetsklausuler - konkurrensbegränsning eller undantag för genuin agent?
(2018) JURM02 20182Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Tack vare internet är det idag möjligt för en slutkund att jämföra priser och produkter online på olika hemsidor, innan slutkunden väljer att genomföra köpet. Det stora utbudet av varor och tjänster på internet har ökat konkurrensen på marknaden. För att tackla den ökade konkurrensen på marknaden har många aktörer online valt att använda sig av avtalsbegränsningar med sina avtalsparter. Bland annat online-resebyråer använder sig av prisparitetsklausuler i avtalsförhållandet med hotellen.
När online-resebyråer använder sig av horisontella prisparitetsklausuler med ett hotell, innebär det att hotellen inte får erbjuda förmånligare hotellrumspriser hos andra online-resebyråer. Vid tillämpningen av vertikala prisparitetsklausuler får... (More) - Tack vare internet är det idag möjligt för en slutkund att jämföra priser och produkter online på olika hemsidor, innan slutkunden väljer att genomföra köpet. Det stora utbudet av varor och tjänster på internet har ökat konkurrensen på marknaden. För att tackla den ökade konkurrensen på marknaden har många aktörer online valt att använda sig av avtalsbegränsningar med sina avtalsparter. Bland annat online-resebyråer använder sig av prisparitetsklausuler i avtalsförhållandet med hotellen.
När online-resebyråer använder sig av horisontella prisparitetsklausuler med ett hotell, innebär det att hotellen inte får erbjuda förmånligare hotellrumspriser hos andra online-resebyråer. Vid tillämpningen av vertikala prisparitetsklausuler får hotellen inte erbjuda förmånligare hotellpriser på deras egna hemsidor.
Online-resebyråerna hävdar att avsikten med prisparitetsklausulerna är att undvika snålskjutsproblematiken. Snålskjutsproblematiken uppstår när slutkunden använder sig av tjänsterna på online-resebyråns hemsidor, till exempel för att jämföra priser mellan olika hotellrum eller för att använda sig av online-resebyråns sökfunktioner, för att sedan reservera hotellnatten förmånligare på hotellets egen hemsida.
Hotellen hävdar att online-resebyråerna använder sig av prisparitetsklausuler för att prisreglera på marknaden. Hotellen menar att online-resebyråernas tillämpning av prisparitetsklausuler faller under förbudet för konkurrenshämmande avtal i artikel 101.1 FEUF.
Online-resebyråernas användning av prisparitetsklausuler har inte avgjorts på EU-nivå. Däremot har nationella domstolar och nationella konkurrensmyndigheter beslutat i frågan. I Tyskland har nationella konkurrensmyndigheten Bundeskartellamt beslutat att horisontella och vertikala prisparitetsklausuler är konkurrenshämmande och inte ska tillåtas enligt artikel 101.1 FEUF. Nationella konkurrensmyndigheter i Frankrike och Sverige har däremot beslutat att vertikala prisparitetsklausuler inte är konkurrenshämmande och ska tillåtas för att snålskjutsproblematiken inte ska uppstå för online-resebyråerna. Svenska Patent- och marknadsdomstolen beslutade kort efter Konkurrensverkets beslut att vertikala prisparitetsklausuler strider mot artikel 101.1 FEUF och ska inte tillämpas i avtalsförhållanden mellan online-resebyråer och hotell. De nationella konkurrensmyndigheterna och de nationella domstolarna har inte fattat samma beslut, vilket bevisar att tillämpningen av EU:s konkurrensrätt på prisparitetsklausuler inte är entydig.
Samtidigt har det diskuterats i litteraturen om förhållandet mellan online- resebyråer och hotell kan undantas artikel 101.1 FEUF eftersom avtalsparterna faller under definitionen för genuin agent. Genuina agentförhållanden regleras i EU-kommissionens vertikala riktlinjer. För att ett genuint agentförhållande ska föreligga, och för att avtalsparterna tillsammans ska utgöra en ekonomisk entitet, får agenten inte åta sig finansiella eller ekonomiska risker för den verksamhet hen ska utföra för huvudmannen. I EU-kommissionens vertikala riktlinjer nämns bland annat risker som lagerkostnader, äganderätt och ansvar för tredje mans vårdslöshet.
Frågan om online-resebyråer faller under definitionen för genuin agent har inte avgjorts på EU-nivå. Däremot har tyska Bundeskartellamt i ett mål gällande online-resebyrån Booking.com:s användning av prisparitetsklausuler, beslutat att online-resebyrån inte uppfyllde kraven för en genuin agent.
Slutsatsen i uppsatsen är att artikel 101.1 FEUF är tillämpbar på horisontella prisparitetsklausuler eftersom dessa klausuler är konkurrensbegränsande. De horisontella prisparitetsklausulerna har konkurrenshämmande effekter i form av att de gör det svårare för nya online-resebyråer att etablera sig på marknaden och därmed kan höja hotellpriserna.
De vertikala prisparitetsklausulerna faller dock inte under artikel 101.1 FEUF eftersom de inte har någon konkurrenshämmande effekt på marknaden. Snålskjutsproblematiken anses för påtaglig för att vertikala prisparitetsklausuler inte ska tillåtas.
I uppsatsen konstateras även att online-resebyråerna undantas artikel 101.1 FEUF eftersom online-resebyråerna uppfyller kraven i EU-kommissionens vertikala riktlinjer för genuin agent. Online-resebyråerna åtar sig inga ekonomiska eller finansiella risker i form av bland annat lagerkostnader, ägande av kontraktsvaror eller tredje mans vårdslöshet. (Less) - Abstract
- It is nowadays possible, thanks to the internet, for an end-customer to compare prices and products online on different websites, before choosing to make the purchase. The wide range of goods and services on internet has increased competition on the relevant market. In order to tackle the increased competition on the market, many online operators have chosen to apply contractual restrictions with their contracting parties. Online travel agencies choose to apply price parity clauses in the contractual relationship with the hotels.
When online travel agencies use horizontal price parity clauses with a hotel, it means that the hotels are not allowed to offer hotel rooms to a lower rate on other online travel agencies. When applying... (More) - It is nowadays possible, thanks to the internet, for an end-customer to compare prices and products online on different websites, before choosing to make the purchase. The wide range of goods and services on internet has increased competition on the relevant market. In order to tackle the increased competition on the market, many online operators have chosen to apply contractual restrictions with their contracting parties. Online travel agencies choose to apply price parity clauses in the contractual relationship with the hotels.
When online travel agencies use horizontal price parity clauses with a hotel, it means that the hotels are not allowed to offer hotel rooms to a lower rate on other online travel agencies. When applying vertical price parity clauses, the hotels are not entitled to offer lower hotel prices on their own websites.
The online travel agencies state that the intention with applying price parity clauses is to avoid the free-riding problem. The problem of free-riding occurs when the end customer uses the services on the online travel agency’s websites, for example to compare prices between different hotel rooms or to use the online travel agency's search functions, and later reserves the hotel night for a lower price on the hotel's own website.
The hotels claim that the online travel agencies apply price parity clauses with intention to set the prices on the market. The hotels state that the online travel agencies’ application of price parity clauses falls under the prohibition of anti-competitive agreements in article 101.1 TFEU.
The online travel agencies' use of price parity clauses has not been decided at EU level. However, national courts and national competition authorities have decided on this issue. In Germany, the Bundeskartellamt has ruled that horizontal and vertical price parity clauses are anti-competitive and should not be allowed under article 101.1 TFEU. On the other hand, national competition authorities in France and Sweden, have decided that vertical price parity clauses are not anti-competitive and should be allowed in order to avoid the free-riding problem for online travel agencies. Shortly after the Swedish Competition Authority's decision, the Swedish Patent and Market Court decided that vertical price parity clauses are applicable under article 101.1 TFEU and should not be applied in contractual relations between online travel agencies and hotels. The national competition authorities and the national courts have not come to the same conclusion. This proves that the application of EU competition law on price parity clauses is not very clear.
At the same time, it has been discussed in the literature whether the relationship between online travel agencies and hotels can be exempted from article 101.1 TFEU since the contracting parties fall under the definition of a genuine agency. A genuine agency relationship is regulated in the EU Vertical Guidelines. In order for a genuine agency relationship to exist and for the contracting parties to form a single entity, the agent must not undertake financial or commercial risks for the activities the agent performs for the principal. The EU Vertical Guidelines mention risks such as inventory costs, ownership of the contractual goods and responsibility for a third-party’s negligence.
The question if online travel agents fall under the definition of genuine agency has not been settled at EU level. However, the German Bundeskartellamt, in a case concerning the online travel agency Booking.com's use of price parity clauses, has decided that the online travel agency did not meet the requirements of a genuine agency.
The paper comes to the conclusion that article 101.1 TFEU applies to horizontal price parity clauses, since these clauses are anti-competitive. The horizontal price parity clauses have anti-competitive effects since they make it more difficult for new online travel agencies to establish on the market and could thereby increase hotel prices. However, the vertical price parity clauses do not fall under article 101.1 TFEU as they do not have anti- competitive effect on the market. The free-riding problem is considered to be too obvious for vertical price parity clauses not to be allowed.
The paper also comes to the conclusion that the online travel agents are exempted from article 101.1 TFEU since the online travel agencies meet the requirements of the EU Vertical Guidelines’ for genuine agency. The online travel agents do not undertake any financial or commercial risks such as inventory costs, ownership of contract goods or third parties' negligence. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8965732
- author
- Suomela, Beatrice LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Online travel agencies' use of price parity clauses - restriction of competition or exemption for genuine agency?
- course
- JURM02 20182
- year
- 2018
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- konkurrensrätt, EU-rätt, prisparitetsklausuler
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8965732
- date added to LUP
- 2019-01-31 13:10:11
- date last changed
- 2019-01-31 13:10:11
@misc{8965732,
abstract = {{It is nowadays possible, thanks to the internet, for an end-customer to compare prices and products online on different websites, before choosing to make the purchase. The wide range of goods and services on internet has increased competition on the relevant market. In order to tackle the increased competition on the market, many online operators have chosen to apply contractual restrictions with their contracting parties. Online travel agencies choose to apply price parity clauses in the contractual relationship with the hotels.
When online travel agencies use horizontal price parity clauses with a hotel, it means that the hotels are not allowed to offer hotel rooms to a lower rate on other online travel agencies. When applying vertical price parity clauses, the hotels are not entitled to offer lower hotel prices on their own websites.
The online travel agencies state that the intention with applying price parity clauses is to avoid the free-riding problem. The problem of free-riding occurs when the end customer uses the services on the online travel agency’s websites, for example to compare prices between different hotel rooms or to use the online travel agency's search functions, and later reserves the hotel night for a lower price on the hotel's own website.
The hotels claim that the online travel agencies apply price parity clauses with intention to set the prices on the market. The hotels state that the online travel agencies’ application of price parity clauses falls under the prohibition of anti-competitive agreements in article 101.1 TFEU.
The online travel agencies' use of price parity clauses has not been decided at EU level. However, national courts and national competition authorities have decided on this issue. In Germany, the Bundeskartellamt has ruled that horizontal and vertical price parity clauses are anti-competitive and should not be allowed under article 101.1 TFEU. On the other hand, national competition authorities in France and Sweden, have decided that vertical price parity clauses are not anti-competitive and should be allowed in order to avoid the free-riding problem for online travel agencies. Shortly after the Swedish Competition Authority's decision, the Swedish Patent and Market Court decided that vertical price parity clauses are applicable under article 101.1 TFEU and should not be applied in contractual relations between online travel agencies and hotels. The national competition authorities and the national courts have not come to the same conclusion. This proves that the application of EU competition law on price parity clauses is not very clear.
At the same time, it has been discussed in the literature whether the relationship between online travel agencies and hotels can be exempted from article 101.1 TFEU since the contracting parties fall under the definition of a genuine agency. A genuine agency relationship is regulated in the EU Vertical Guidelines. In order for a genuine agency relationship to exist and for the contracting parties to form a single entity, the agent must not undertake financial or commercial risks for the activities the agent performs for the principal. The EU Vertical Guidelines mention risks such as inventory costs, ownership of the contractual goods and responsibility for a third-party’s negligence.
The question if online travel agents fall under the definition of genuine agency has not been settled at EU level. However, the German Bundeskartellamt, in a case concerning the online travel agency Booking.com's use of price parity clauses, has decided that the online travel agency did not meet the requirements of a genuine agency.
The paper comes to the conclusion that article 101.1 TFEU applies to horizontal price parity clauses, since these clauses are anti-competitive. The horizontal price parity clauses have anti-competitive effects since they make it more difficult for new online travel agencies to establish on the market and could thereby increase hotel prices. However, the vertical price parity clauses do not fall under article 101.1 TFEU as they do not have anti- competitive effect on the market. The free-riding problem is considered to be too obvious for vertical price parity clauses not to be allowed.
The paper also comes to the conclusion that the online travel agents are exempted from article 101.1 TFEU since the online travel agencies meet the requirements of the EU Vertical Guidelines’ for genuine agency. The online travel agents do not undertake any financial or commercial risks such as inventory costs, ownership of contract goods or third parties' negligence.}},
author = {{Suomela, Beatrice}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Online-resebyråers användning av prisparitetsklausuler - konkurrensbegränsning eller undantag för genuin agent?}},
year = {{2018}},
}