An Analysis on Efficient Policy and Test for Competition Control of Undertakings Acquisition: Comparative Study in U.S, E.U and Iranian Law

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Abstract

Today companies acquire other corporations to overcome their competitors. Directors of companies use these strategies for obtaining more portions in competitive markets and increasing business power. But these policies can be regarded as destructive matters which damage market's competitive order. So in such situation we need restrictive policies of competition law. For controlling acquisitions, every legal system has its own policy. Sometimes these policies have fundamental differences with each other which result in diverse views. Differences between particular acquisition policies, are main factors which determine the way of confrontation by competition authorities. As much as these policies are more efficient, the control process of competition authorities would be more favourable. In this way the most important question is what is the best strategy for controlling acquisitions? This paper is going to analyze different approaches in U.S and E.U law in competition issues of acquisitions and compare them with Iranian law views, drawing an efficient strategy for controlling acquisitions in competitive markets. In this way, the most impressive policy is one which considers structural differences between merger and acquisition and provides exhaustive control on diverse aspects of latter one. It shouldn't concentrate on merely some competition disrupting aspects of acquisitions such as misuse of dominant position.

Keywords

References

  • Almasan, Andriana & Whelan, Peter (2017) The Consistent Application of EU Competition Law, Bucharest: Library of Congress.
  • Andreangeli, Andrew (2008) EU Competition Enforcement, Northampton: Edward Elgar.
  • Anthony Buonos & Bowditch, James ( 2003 ) The Human Side of Mergers and Acquisitions, Beardbooks: Washington DC
  • Borja, Martinez Fernandez (2004) "The Implementation of The European Commission Merger Regalation", Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Vol.4, pp.791-809.
  • Cayseele, Van, Patrick & Van de Bergh, Roger (2000) Antitrust Law in Boudewijn Bouckaert and Gerrit De Geest, Encyclopedia of Law and Economic, Vol.3, Available at http://Papers.ssrn.com, Last visited: 2015/2/2
  • Chattopadhyay, Paresh (2011) Electric Utility Mergers: Principle of Antitrust Analysis, Westport, GreenWood Publishing Group.
  • Cini, Michelle (2013) Competition Policy in The European Union, London: Palgrave.
  • Council Regulation (EEC) on The Control of Concentrations Between Undertakings, No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989.
  • Dennis, Campbell & Susan, Cotter (1995) Comparative Law, London: Kluwe Law.
  • Dabbah, Maher (2010) International and Comparative Competition Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Dana, Gold (2009) Law and Economics, London: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  • Eleanor, Mfox & Michael, J Trebilcock (2013) The Design of Competition Law Institutions, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Eugene Buttigieg (2011) Competition Law: Safeguarding the Consumer Interest, New York: Kluwer Law International.
  • Folsom, Ralph (2012) European Union Law After Maastricht, Hague: Kluwer Law.
  • Hawk, Barry (2009) International Antitrust Law and Policy, New York: Juris Publishing.
  • Hdebrand, Doris (2009) The Role of Economic Analysis in The EC Competition Rules, Boston: Wolter Kluwer.
  • Hildebrandt International Firm (2004) Anatomy of Law Firm Merger, Chicago: American Bar Association.
  • Mantysaari, Petri (2010) The Law of Corporate Finance, New York:
  • Middleton, Kirsty (2001) Case and Materials on UK and EC Competition Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press:
  • Murosa, Stefen (2017) Social Market Economy, New York: Springer.
  • S Deparment of Justice (1968) Merger Guidelines, May 30.
  • S Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission (2010) Horizontal Merger Guideline, August 19.
  • Jones, Alison (2016) Private Enforcement of EU Competition Law: a Comparison with and Lessons From The US, Research Paper of Dickson Poon Transnational Law Institute, London: King College, No.10.
  • Wilson, Josoph; (2003) Golobalization and the Limits of National Control Laws, New York: Kluwer Law International.
  • Kaczorowska, Alina (2013) European Union Law, London: Routledge.
  • Kauper, Thoma (1973) The 1982 Horizontal Merger Guidelines: of Collusion, Efficiency and Failure; Scholarship Paper, Vol.71, iss2/10. Available at: http://Scholarship.law.berely.edu/californialawreview Last Visited at: 2017/5/12.
  • Lee, William (2017) The Law of Public Communication, New York: Routledge.
  • Lindsay, Alistair (2012) The EU Merger Regulation, London: Sweet & Maxwell.
  • Mackenrodt, Oliver (2008) Abuse of Domain Position, Munich: Springer.
  • Pozdnakova, Alla (2014) Liner Shipping and EU Competition Law, Netherland: Kluwer Law.
  • Renato, Nazzini (2011) The Foundations of Eouropean Union Competition Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Rodger, Barry & Angus, Macculloch (2015) Competition Law and Policy in The EU and UK, New York: Routledge.
  • Rosado Cubero, Ana (2010) Barriers to Competition, New York: Routledge.
  • Soebhaenullah Khan, Muhammad (1992) Regulation and Control of Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices, New Dlhi: Royal Book Co.
  • Varloop, Peter; Landes, Valerie, Landes (2003) Merger Control in Europe, London: Kluwer Law.

 

Cases

 

-Case No C-475/99 Judgment of the Court. (21, October 2003)

-Case No 152-3181. (May 23, 2016) FTC v. Lord & Taylor, LLC

-Case No 8692. ( February 21, 1966)FTC v. Delco Carpet, INC.

-Case No 85/76. (Jun ,21 ,1979) Hoffmann- La Roche v. Commission

-Case No C-620/13 P Case Before the General Court / T- 226/09, ( 22, October 2014)

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics