Economic Theory and Competition Law
Show Less

Economic Theory and Competition Law

Edited by Josef Drexl, Laurence Idot and Joël Monéger

The context for this book is the increasingly complex relationship between economic theory and competition law which gives rise to lively political and academic debate on the direction competition law should take in a more global and innovation-oriented market place.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 15: A Brief Overview of Some Conflicts between Economic Efficiency and Effectiveness of the Administrative or Judicial Process in Competition Law

Antoine Louvaris


15. A brief overview of some conflicts between economic efficiency and effectiveness of the administrative or judicial process in competition law Antoine Louvaris* 1 PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS Economic efficiency is a complex notion and its crowning as the linchpin of competition law is controversial. Nonetheless, it is possible to adopt a simple, but sufficiently operational, approach to economic efficiency for the purpose of this chapter. ‘In the context of industrial organization economics and competition law and policy, it relates to the most effective manner of utilizing scarce resources.’1 To suggest that competition law aims at economic efficiency should logically imply, to put it bluntly, that only practices that reduce the well-being of consumers should be forbidden, without prejudice to focal and absolute per se prohibitions as the basis for condemning cartels, ‘the supreme evil of antitrust’.2 Positive competition law is far from reaching this conclusion, supposing that it should. Undoubtedly, there is still an increasing propensity to promote economic efficiency in the competition law of prominent jurisdictions, such as the EC, at least since the Guidelines on Vertical Restraints3 and, later on, since the * Professor of Public Law at the University of Paris Dauphine. 1 OECD, ‘Glossary of Industrial Organisation Economics and Competition Law’, (accessed 31 January 2008), p 41. 2 Verizon Communications Inc v Law Offices of Curtis V Trinko LLP 540 US 398, 408 (2004). 3 See Commission Notice – Guidelines on vertical restraints, 13 October 2000, [2000...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.