Learn Essays

HOME F.A.Q. REGISTER LOGIN SEARCH  
Essay Topics
Acceptance
Art
Business
Custom Written
Direct Essays
English
Example Essays
Foreign
History
Medical
Mega Essays
Miscellaneous
Movies
Music
Novels
People
Politics
Pre-Written
Religion
Science
Search
Speeches
Sports
Technology

Click here to get paid up to $147 / hour to take simple surveys


Featured Papers from RadEssays

1. Marketing
2. International Business
3. International Business
4. international accounting
5. Political Science and Law
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login

international business law

Andrew Airline v TinyAir The competition issues about AA and TA, which are based in the member states of EC, should be regulated in EC treaty. In the case, we must make the following questions clear: 1) If AA¡¯ right on Amsterdam-New York route was illegally damaged by TA; 2) Whether the price reduction by TA on Amsterdam-Helsinki is allowed under EC treaty. Also we should make sure whether the merger between AA and another company is under the protection of EC treaty. In the first situation, we could find the answer from Article 82. It is laid down in Article 82 that ¡°any abuse by one or more undertakings or dominant position within the common market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited¡±. In order to identify whether there is an abuse of dominance in the case, we need to identify ¡°the common market¡± at first. In Article 82, market is divided into two kinds of markets, ¡°geographical market1 and product market2¡±. Primary tests have been addressed in United Brands3 to point out the common market based on price, use and qualities and interchange as well. Also which could lead us to find the common market involved in the present case. So it is fairly clear that the first problem occurred between AA and TA is in a service market from Amsterdam-New York route. Then, we move to the second test to identify the dominance position in the present case. The dominance is defined as ¡®the power to behave independently in an economic sense¡¯ in Hoffmann-La Roche v Commission4. The most obvious test is market share. But in the present case, we can¡¯t find exactly its market share in the Amsterdam-New York route. The definition of ¡®successful¡¯ is very ambiguous. There are many uncertainties. From the case, we find that TA tried to hinder the emergence of AA by refusing supply service. Whether TA has a dominant position depends on whether TA has independent power on the service.


Approximate Word count = 1292
Approximate Pages = 5.2
(250 words per page double spaced)
Over 101,000 Essays and Term Papers!!
Links
international business

domestic and international law in australia

Copyright should be reinstated

international business

lesson in law

domestic and international law in australia

Support
F.A.Q.
Custom Essays
Payment
Learn Essays
Forgot Password?
Activation Email
More Links
All Papers Are For Research And Reference Purposes Only! You may not turn these papers in as your own! You must cite our web site as your source!
Copyright 2003-2008 learnessays.com. All rights reserved.