SERGEY PUZYREVSKY: THE INSTITUTION OF COLLECTIVE DOMINANCE PROTECTS COMPETITION IN OLIGOPOLISTIC MARKETS

20-02-2021 | 10:27

In establishing collective dominance, it is important to analyze the behavior of all participants

The ratio of individual and collective dominance was discussed by participants of the Antimonopoly Forum – 2021.

The participants of the discussion noted that in establishing collective dominance, it is important to analyze the behavior of all participants, and if the influence of only one entity on the market is established, then there is no question of collective dominance, only this entity will bear responsibility.

Deputy Head of the FAS Russia Sergey Puzyrevsky said during his speech at the Forum session:

“Everyone is responsible for their own behavior. Collective dominance itself is not a violation, but the abuse of a dominant position is illegal. There are violations that can be committed with the participation of all members of the team. For example, the withdrawal of goods from circulation, the establishment of a monopolistically high price. And there are individual ones - refusal to conclude a contract, establishment of discriminatory conditions”.

The institution of collective domination is at the interface of the institution of concerted actions by entities and anti-competitive agreements.

The difference between the abuse of collective dominance and concerted actions was also discussed during the session.

“If we are talking about anti - competitive agreements between economic entities that are competitors, then this is a cartel, not collective dominance,” Sergey Puzyrevsky noted.

 Reference:

The institution of collective dominance was introduced in the Russian antimonopoly practice in 2006, in parallel with the adoption of the Law on Protection of Competition.



Site Map

News & Events Press Releases Media Releases Image Library About the FAS Russia What We Do General Information Mission, Goals, Values Priority Setting Institutional Memory Stakeholders Engagement Center for Education and Methodics Our History Our Structure Powers of Head and Deputy Heads Our Ratings GCR Using our website International Cooperation Treaties & Agreements OECD Competition Committee OECD meetings 2013 OECD meetings 2014 OECD meetings 2015 OECD meetings 2016 OECD meetings 2017 OECD meetings 2018 OECD meetings 2019 OECD meetings 2020 FAS Annual Reports OECD-GVH RCC RCC Newsletter ICAP Council on Advertising Headquarters for Joint Investigations UNCTAD 13th session IGE UNCTAD Resolution Russian contributions 14th session IGE UNCTAD Resolution Russian contributions 15th session IGE UNCTAD 16th session IGE UNCTAD 17th session IGE UNCTAD 18th session IGE UNCTAD 8th UN Conference on Competition EEU Model Law on Competition ICN BRICS BRICS Conferences Documents The BRICS Competition Law and Policy Centre (BRICS Competition Centre) BRICS Working Groups for the research of competition issues in socially important markets The Working Group for Research on the Competition Issues in the Pharmaceutical Markets Chair: Russia The Working Group for Research on food value chains Chair: South Africa The Working Group for Research on the Competition Issues in the Automobile Markets Co-chaired: India, South Africa The Working Group for Research on the Competition Issues in the Digital Markets Co-chairs: Brazil, Russia BRICS Coordination Committee on antimonopoly policy EU APEC Competition Policy and Law Group Annual meetings Projects ERRA Full Members Organizational Structure Archive Working Group on Investigating Issues on Pricing in the Oil and Oil Product Markets and Methods of their Functioning Meetings Working Group for Studying Competition Problems in the Pharmaceutical Sector Working Group on Research of Competition Issues in the Market of International Telecommunications (Roaming) Document Library Legislation Reports & Analytics Cases & decisions Contacts Give feedback Contact us Links Authorities Worldwide COVID-19