Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Self-preferencing - En ny kategori av missbruk?

Karlsson, Matilda LU (2024) LAGF03 20241
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The digital market has pushed the development of competition law. The ques- tion has arisen whether current competition rules can preserve and protect competition and consumers in digital markets, especially considering the rise of digital giants like Google. This issue was particularly highlighted in the Commission’s decision in the Google Shopping case. The decision concerned Google’s abuse of dominant position under art.102 TFUE and notably intro- duced a new category of abuse: self-preferencing. The introduction of self- preferencing has been highly debated and has received criticism from a legal perspective, particularly from Google and other tech-giants.

Considering this, the thesis aims to answer the following questions: what is... (More)
The digital market has pushed the development of competition law. The ques- tion has arisen whether current competition rules can preserve and protect competition and consumers in digital markets, especially considering the rise of digital giants like Google. This issue was particularly highlighted in the Commission’s decision in the Google Shopping case. The decision concerned Google’s abuse of dominant position under art.102 TFUE and notably intro- duced a new category of abuse: self-preferencing. The introduction of self- preferencing has been highly debated and has received criticism from a legal perspective, particularly from Google and other tech-giants.

Considering this, the thesis aims to answer the following questions: what is self-preferencing and whether self-preferencing legally can be considered a separate category of abuse based on already existing categories of abuse. The question is examined based on current law, the Commission’s decision, the tribunal’s ruling, and the opinion of Advocate General Kokott.

The thesis concludes the following answer to the first questions: self-prefer- encing constitutes a form of discriminatory abuse, which means that a domi- nant company favors its own products or services at the expense of competi- tors through discriminatory abuses. This occurs through a leveraging effect, where the dominant company uses its market position on one platform to pro- mote its own business on another market. Furthermore, in answer to the sec- ond question, this behavior is sufficiently distinct from previously established categories of abuse to constitute a separate category of abuse.

In summary the introduction of self-preferencing can be seen as an attempt by the Commission to adapt the regulatory framework to the rapidly growing digital economy. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Den digitala marknaden har ställt den konkurrensrättsliga utvecklingen på sin spets. Frågan har uppkommit huruvida nuvarande konkurrensrättsliga regler har förmågan att bevara och skydda konkurrensen och konsumenterna på den digitala marknaden. Detta framför allt med tanke på de digitala jättarnas fram- växt, som exempelvis Google. Denna problematik belystes särskilt i kom- missionens beslut, Google Shopping. Beslutet rörde Googles missbruk av do- minerande ställning enligt art. 102 FEUF och det som var intressant var att kommissionen, i beslutet, introducerade en ny kategori av missbruk, self-pre- ferencing. Introduktionen av self-preferencing har varit mycket omtalad och har fått rättslig kritik från, framför allt, tech-giganterna.

... (More)
Den digitala marknaden har ställt den konkurrensrättsliga utvecklingen på sin spets. Frågan har uppkommit huruvida nuvarande konkurrensrättsliga regler har förmågan att bevara och skydda konkurrensen och konsumenterna på den digitala marknaden. Detta framför allt med tanke på de digitala jättarnas fram- växt, som exempelvis Google. Denna problematik belystes särskilt i kom- missionens beslut, Google Shopping. Beslutet rörde Googles missbruk av do- minerande ställning enligt art. 102 FEUF och det som var intressant var att kommissionen, i beslutet, introducerade en ny kategori av missbruk, self-pre- ferencing. Introduktionen av self-preferencing har varit mycket omtalad och har fått rättslig kritik från, framför allt, tech-giganterna.

Uppsatsen har, mot bakgrund av ovanstående, syftat till att besvara frågeställ- ningarna; vad är self-preferencing och vidare om self-preferencing rättsligt kan anses utgöra en egen kategori av missbruk utifrån redan existerande ka- tegorier av missbruk. Frågan ställs med utgångspunkt i gällande rätt, kom- missionens beslut, tribunalens dom och generaladvokat Kokotts förslag till avgörande.

Uppsatsen kommer fram till följande svar på den första frågeställningen; self- preferencing utgör en form av diskriminerande missbruk, vilket innebär att ett dominerande företag gynnar sina egna produkter eller tjänster på bekost- nad av konkurrenter genom diskriminerande handlingar. Detta sker via häv- stångseffekt, där det dominerande företaget använder sin marknadsposition på en plattform för att främja sin egen verksamhet på en annan marknad. Där- till, som svar på den andra frågan, är detta agerande tillräckligt distinkt från tidigare redan etablerade kategorier av missbruk för att utgöra en egen kate- gori av missbruk.

Sammanfattningsvis kan introduktionen av self-preferencing ses som ett för- sök av kommissionen att anpassa regelverket till den snabbt växande digitala ekonomin. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Karlsson, Matilda LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20241
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Konkurrensrätt, EU-rätt
language
Swedish
id
9153270
date added to LUP
2024-06-26 11:56:21
date last changed
2024-06-26 11:56:21
@misc{9153270,
  abstract     = {{The digital market has pushed the development of competition law. The ques- tion has arisen whether current competition rules can preserve and protect competition and consumers in digital markets, especially considering the rise of digital giants like Google. This issue was particularly highlighted in the Commission’s decision in the Google Shopping case. The decision concerned Google’s abuse of dominant position under art.102 TFUE and notably intro- duced a new category of abuse: self-preferencing. The introduction of self- preferencing has been highly debated and has received criticism from a legal perspective, particularly from Google and other tech-giants.

Considering this, the thesis aims to answer the following questions: what is self-preferencing and whether self-preferencing legally can be considered a separate category of abuse based on already existing categories of abuse. The question is examined based on current law, the Commission’s decision, the tribunal’s ruling, and the opinion of Advocate General Kokott.

The thesis concludes the following answer to the first questions: self-prefer- encing constitutes a form of discriminatory abuse, which means that a domi- nant company favors its own products or services at the expense of competi- tors through discriminatory abuses. This occurs through a leveraging effect, where the dominant company uses its market position on one platform to pro- mote its own business on another market. Furthermore, in answer to the sec- ond question, this behavior is sufficiently distinct from previously established categories of abuse to constitute a separate category of abuse.

In summary the introduction of self-preferencing can be seen as an attempt by the Commission to adapt the regulatory framework to the rapidly growing digital economy.}},
  author       = {{Karlsson, Matilda}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Self-preferencing - En ny kategori av missbruk?}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}