X hits on this document

14 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

4 / 4

internet access services. After its inspec­tion, the Competition Board decided that the group had abused its dominant posi­tion in the wholesale market for broadband internet access services through price compression in the retail market for broad­band internet access services and imposed monetary fines.

The decisions of the Competition Board generally follow the precedents of the Euro­pean Commission and case law of the Eu­ropean courts. The Competition Board also tends to adopt narrow market definitions. This approach generally results in the high market shares for undertakings concerned and so makes finding a dominant position in these product markets easy. Under Eu­ropean Competition Law, undertakings with a 50% market share are legally presumed to be in a dominant position. However, a company with a 33% market share may still be found dominant.

In addition, abusive practices are not exhaustive under Turkish competition law practice. There might be circumstances where the abusive practices of the under­takings are not clearly explained under the Law. What constitutes an abusive practice and what does not is determined on a case-by-case basis.

This document is for general guidance only and does not constitute definitive advice.  Any reproduction, in whole or in part, of this paper is expressly prohibited, other than for personal use and may not be recopied or shared with a third party. The permission to recopy by an individual does not allow for incorporation of material in part or in whole in any work or publication, whether in hard copy, electronic, or any other form, unless specific mention is made to the source.  

Document info
Document views14
Page views14
Page last viewedSat Dec 03 02:46:46 UTC 2016
Pages4
Paragraphs41
Words1942

Comments