Email: thnga@[Link].

vn
Antitrust: chống độc quyền
Competition law: luật cạnh tranh
Institution=authorities
Cabinet: nội các (có thể hiểu đơn giản là Chính phủ theo plVN)

Điểm giữa kỳ
Bài kiểm tra cá nhân buổi cuối + bài thuyết trình nhóm
Bài kiểm tra cuối kỳ (chỉ được sử dụng VBPL)

CHAPTER OVERVIEW
MATERIALS SOURCES:
- Homepage of the US DOJ & FTC
- Homepage of the EU & the EU Commission
- Legislative documents provided by the lecturer
- Other materials
STRUCTURE:
1. Introduction to the US and the EU
1.1 General approach
1.1.1 The US
US: 50 states and 1 federal district (50 stars=50 states)
1.1.2 The EU
- EU: 27 member states (independent countries) ->the most important treaty: Treaty of
Lisbon - Treaty on the functioning of the EU (we use some provisions in this treaty)
(12stars=perfection)
1.2
1.3 US and EU institutions
1.3.1 The US
"Separation of powers" - 3 branches/pillars
- Legislative branch (makes law): Congress- House of Representatives (435 members)
and Senate (100 members)
- Judicial branch (interpret and evaluate law): Supreme Court ->court of appeal (circuit
court) (12+1: ->district court (94)
- Executive branch (enforces/carries out law): president -> Department and commission
(15) + 2 agencies (CIA & Environmental Protection Agency)
DOF: Department of Justice ->related to competition law
1.3.2 The EU
- EU Council
+ Around 4 meetings a year (at least 2)
+ Heads of state or government + EU
+ Setting the EU's general political direction and priorities; complex or sensitive issues
+ No power to pass laws

- EU Parliament
+ One of the EU'S main law-making institutions
+ Members of the EU Parliament (MEPS) represent the people
+ MEPS of each country - propotion to its population
+ 3 roles:
-Debating and passing EU laws
-Scrinitizing other EU institutions
-Debating and adopting the EU's budget

- Council of the EU: another institution

+Meetings of national ministers from each EU country
+6 roles
-Passing EU laws
-Coordinating the broad economic policies of EU member state
-Signing agreement by/with EU and other countries
-Approcing the annual EU budget
-Developing the EU's foreign ....
....

- EC commission
+27 commissioners +permanent staff (in departments)
+4 roles:
-Enforcing EU law
-Proposing new laws to parliament and the council
-Managing the EU'S budget and allocating funding

- The court of justice of the EU

+ 1 judge per EU country
+Helped by 8 advocates-General
+2 levels: gênral court and court of justice
+Each case - 1 judge and 1 advocate general
+cases are processed in 2 stages: written stage and oral stage

1.4 US and EU legislation

1.4.1 US
A. Federal law
- Bills (Dự luật): created and passed by Congress, then signed by the president. May be
reviewed and stroked down by the federal courts
- Regulations: issued by federal agencies, boards or commissions.
Rule-making process: ?
- State law: created and passed by the state congress. ..
B. State law and regulations
- Bills
- Rehulations
1.4.2. EU
A. primary legislation
TREATIES
B. secondary legislation
- Regulations:
+Applicable in all EU countries
+Become law for all members
- Directives: details of how results are to be implemented are left to member states
- Decisions: deal with a particular issue and specifically mentioned/persons/organizations

EU LAW MAKING?
Treaties: agreed by Presidents and or Prime Ministers + ratified by parliaments
Regu/dir/decision: Proposed by the EU commission + approved by the EU parliament
and EU council.

ORDINARY LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE (CO-DECISION)

- The EU parliament has to approve EU legislation together with the council
- Applied to the vast majority of the EU laws

SPECIAL
-Consultation: Art 289 TFEU
- Consent: Art 289 TFEU

B. State law and regulations

2. Introduction to US antitrust and EU competition law
3. Anti-competitive agreement
4. Abuse of dominant position
5. Mergers
6. Competition law enforcement
Questions:
1. Ukraine is the 27th member state of the EU
- False
- Croatia is the 17th member state of the EU, not Ukraine. Besides, Ukraine had applied
to become a member of the EU, but its requirement was not accepted for some reasons.
2. The current motto of the US is "In God, we trust."
- Incorrect
- True but insufficient: "Out of many, one"
3. 27 yellow stars are linked in a circle on the EU flag to represent its 27 member
states
- False
- The EU flag has only 12 stars, representing its 12 member states. The EU flag is a circle
of 12 gold stars on a blue background, symbolizing unity, solidarity, and harmony among
the peoples of Europe. The number 12 is a symbol of perfection and completeness and
does not represent the number of member states. The blue background represents the
clear skies of the Western world, and the gold stars against the blue background stand for
clarity, peace, and stability.
4. The 94 US judicial districts are organized into 12 regional circuits, each of which
has a US court of appeals
- Correct
- Source: US Court gov.....
- The 94 U.S. judicial districts are indeed organized into 12 regional circuits, and each
circuit has a U.S. Court of Appeals. The US is divided into 94 federal judicial districts
(each state has at least one). These districts are grouped into 12 regional circuits. Each
circuit has a U.S. Court of Appeals, which hears appeals from the district courts within its
region.
(12+1: 12 are the regional circuits, each covering specific geographic areas of the
United States.
(e.g., 1st Circuit covers Maine, Massachusetts, etc.; 9th Circuit covers California,
Arizona, etc.) +1 refers to the Federal Circuit (SPECIAL), which is not based on
geography.)

5. If a least 2/3 of the 27 Commissioners agree with it, the draft of the proposed new
law is then sent to the Council of Europe and Parliament for deciding whether to
adopt it as a law.
- Incorrect
- Art 250 TFEU
- There are 2 main points that make this statement incorrect
- The name of the council: the EU Council or the Council of the EU
- Method: simple majority (usually more than 50% #2/3) ->14 is enough

6. Congress can override the president's veto of a bill by a qualified majority vote of
both the House and Senate, thereby making the vetoed act a law.
(Quốc hội có thể bác bỏ quyền phủ quyết của tổng thống đối với một dự luật bằng đa số
phiếu đủ điều kiện của cả hạ viện và thượng viện, do đó biến hành động phủ quyết thành
luật.)
- Incorrect
- Section 7 Article 1 of the US Constitution
- Bills - created and passed by Congress, then signed by the President.
- If the President signs the bill, it becomes law. Or the President may veto it. If Congress
votes again and reaches a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate, it can
override the veto, and the bill becomes law.
=>Marjority = usually (more than 50%) # 2/3 (2 terms are not the same)
=>Qualified majority (US system does not use this term) ->used in EU system
"Section 7 Article 1 of the US Constitution: "If, after such Reconsideration of two-thirds
of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to
the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-
thirds of that House, it shall become a Law."
7. Two types of EU legislation are primary law, including EU treaties and secondary
law including member states' law and regulations.
- Incorrect
- TFEU
- There are 2 types of EU legislation, but it's stated like below:
+ Primary legislation: Treaties
+ Secondary legislation: Regulations, Directives, Decisions
=>Does not include national law (member state's law)

CHAPTER 2: US ANTITRUST & EU COMPETITION LAW

PART 1
Two or more parties (companies/entities)
Fight hard to get/win something
They have the same purpose/target
- Describe the picture: so many people fight with each other to get the highest point.
Some of them fail, some of them can continue to get over the next. ->Monopoly: person
has the highest position
- Competition is good: become the motivation for company to improve the quality of
their product ->consumers get the best interests
- Competition is bad: somehow company use bad tools to fight to get the highest position,
not based on fair method but dirty, unfair method to make harms to their competitors
What is competition: the existence within a market for some goods or services of a
sufficient number of buyers and sellers such that no single market participant has enough
ìnluence to determine the going price of the goods or service. (In the EU system)
What is antitrust: Anti + trust (a group of commercial enterprises combined to
monopolize and control the market for any commodity) = độc quyền (In the US system)
=>They are the same (have difference on the system)
Unfair competitive conduct: regulated by a different
..... (cái gì nè, chưa hiểu)
PART 2
2.1 US antitrust law
2.1.1 History
- Sherman Act (1890)
- Ferdẻal trade Commission Act (1914)
- Clayton Act (1914), as amended by Robinson - Pactman Act (1936) and Hart - Scott -
Rodino Antitrust
- Improvements Act (1976)
2.1.1 Overview
3 parts: regulated by the firm
- Collusion and oligopoly: thoả thuận, thông đồng và độc quyền
- Monopolization and Attempt: độc quyền
- Mergers: sáp nhập
2.2 EU competition law
2.2.1 History
- EEC treaty 1957
- EC treaty 1992
- EU treaty 2007 - TFEU (Art 101-109). IN RA NHA XUÂN :))
2.2.2 Overview
- Rules applicable to State Aids (trợ cấp CP)
- Rules applicable to firms: quy định áp dụng cho các công ty:
+ Agreements (Art 101)
+ Abuses (Art 102)
+ Mergers (Merger regulations of the EU)
- Rules applicable to Specific Sectors: quy định áp dụng cho lĩnh vực cụ thể
CÂU HỎI NHẬN ĐỊNH:
ODD (LẺ): 1. Similar to US antitrust law, EU competition law comprises 3 parts:
anti-competitive agreement (collusion), abuse of dominant position
(monopolization), and mergers.
- Incorrect
- Nguồn uy tín:)) like: EU widepress, ...
- EU competition law comprises 3 parts (broader): rules applicable to State Aids, Rules
applicable to firms (3 sources of the US are included in this), and Rules applicable to
specific sectors.
- EU is an international organization so the source of law of the EU is broader than the
US (federal country).
EVEN (CHẴN): 2. Under the TFEU, no State Aid in any form to any undertakings
is allowed because it distorts or threatens to distort competition.
- Incorrect
- Art 107 TFEU
- There are exceptions in Clause 2,3 of Art 107 TFEU

PART 3: ANTI - COMPETITVE AGREEMENT

3.1 Basic concepts and rules (Quy định và khái niệm cơ bản)
- Collusion: sự thông đồng
- Oligopoly: độc quyền nhóm
- Combination: sự hợp nhất, kết hợp
->Vietnam Bar association: Đoàn luật sư Việt Nam
- Conspriacy: thoả thuận bí mật (không hợp pháp) (no need to have written form,
evidence to prove) = concerted actions = Concerted practices: hành động phối hợp (2
conditios: ìinformation exchange + paralell conduct: hành động song song)
- Cartel: thoả thuận cạnh tranh
- Contract = agreement
US - Basic rules in Section 1 Sherman Act:
- Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint
of trade or commerce among the several states, or with foreign nations, is declared to be
illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or ângge in any combination or
conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony. (commit a
crime = criminal sanction)
Red: forms of contract
Green: scope of effect
Blue: Purpose
EU - Basic concepts in Art 101 TFEU
- Undertaking: Chủ thể kinh tế/Cam kết
- Association of undertakings:
- Agreement = concerted actions
1. The following shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market: all
agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and
concerted practices which may affect trade between member states and which have as
their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the
internal market, ....
2. Any agreements or decisions prohibited pursuant to this Art shall be a ...
3. .......(về ghi lại phần này)

3.2 Forms of prohibited agreements (Hình thức của hợp đồng bị cấm)
Price fixing: điểm a khoản 1 Điều 101 TFEU
Limit or control elements of the competitive environment:
Share market or sources of supply
Boycott or discrimination: tẩy chay hoặc phân biệt đối xử (refuse to deal) điểm d khoản
1 Điều 101 TFEU ->Nếu có sự phân biệt với các người tiêu thụ cuối cùng thì không được
xem là discrimination (vì điều kiện là phải giữa các trading parties) (vd: bán giá cao cho
KH trẻ, bán giá thấp hơn cho người già); (vd: có sự phân biệt giữa KH LGBT->có thể có
sự vi phạm pháp luật quốc gia (depend on national law), nhưng không có sự vi phạm
LCT)
->Apply similar conditions for unequivalent transactions: case law (it's also
discrimination)
Tying: sản phẩm chính bị ràng buộc (the main products that customers want to buy)
#tied product: sản phẩm được kèm theo - the product must buy if they customer want to
buy tying product)
VD: 2 TV producers require customers to buy an extra TV shelve, besides the TV they
want to buy
VD: Customer wants to a hammer, they have to buy an extra dozens of package snails
=>Ảnh hướng đến 2 thị trường/mối quan hệ:
+ Mối quan hệ giữa các bên thoả thuận với nhau (liên quan đến tying product)
+ Mối quan hệ giữa các tied product (vì các tied product này cũng mang lại lợi ích cho
producers)
SO SÁNH: SS thoả thuận hạn chế cạnh tranh và lạm dụng vị trí thống lĩnh thị
trường
- Anti-competitive agreement: giữa rất nhiều doanh nghiệp, chủ thể với nhau cùng thực
hiện cùng một hành động để đạt điều gì đó (multilateral)
- Abuse - dominant position: hành vi đơn phương của một chủ thể độc lập (unilateral)
PHÂN LOẠI
- Based on position or level of entity
+ Horizontal: giống thoả thuận theo chiều ngang trong LCT tiếng việt (between direct
competitors)
+ Vertical: theo chiều dọc
(Upstream
Suppliers
Producers
Distributors
Retailers
 Downstream
End consummers: người tiêu dùng cuối cùng)
- Based on the level of danger: cartel and other anti-competitive agreements
Cartel: thoả thuận hạn chế cạnh trang gây nguy hại nhất
(Cartel: horizontal agreements ->have 3 kinds of (Price fixing, market division, intention
to terminate specific competitors )
->Per se rules are applied to cartel (mặc nhiên là vi phạm)
->Rules of reasons: other competitive agreements can exempt if they have good reason,
but the cartel do not (cartels always be prohibited)
The notice 2014 of EU: những thoả thuận cạnh tranh nhỏ được miễn trừ như thế nào,
trong đó có quy định có những thoả thuận dù nhỏ đi bao nhiêu đi nữa thì vẫn không được
miễn trừ (hard core restrictions)
1. Purpose: The Notice provides a "safe harbour" for certain cooperation agreements
between companies. It sets out the circumstances under which the European
Commission (EC) considers that an agreement does not appreciably restrict
competition within the meaning of Article 101(1) of the TFEU.
2. Principle: It is based on the Latin maxim De Minimis Non Curat Lex ("the law
does not concern itself with trifles"). The EC will generally not investigate
agreements that fall below a certain threshold of market impact.
3. Market Share Thresholds: An agreement is generally considered de minimis
(meaning it does not appreciably restrict competition) if the aggregate market
share (TỔNG THỊ PHẦN) of the participating undertakings on any relevant
market does not exceed the following thresholds:
+ 10% for agreements between competitors (horizontal agreements).
+ 15% for agreements between non-competitors (vertical agreements).
4. Hardcore Restrictions Exclusion: Importantly, the Notice does not apply to
agreements that contain "hardcore restrictions" (restrictions by object) such as
price-fixing, output limitations, or the sharing of markets/customers. Such
 restrictions are deemed inherently harmful and are covered by Article 101(1)
regardless of the companies' market shares.
3.3 Exemptions (Miễn trừ)
3.3.1 In the US
Miễn trừ cho các đối tượng bên dưới
- Patent owners (chủ SHTT)
- Labor unions and agricultural organizations (Công đoàn lao động và tổ chức nông
nghiệp)
- Certain activities that fall within the scope of the Securities Exchange Act 1934 (các
hoạt động nhất định thuộc vào phạm vi của Quy tắc giao dịch chứng khoán)
3.3.2 In the EU
- Practices beneficial to consumers (Art 101(3) TFEU)
- Agreements of minor importance - small companies, together holding no more than
10% market share (related to the Notice EU 2014)
- Block exemptions for different contract types (Franchise agreement, R&D, ...)
3.4 Leniency policy (chính sách khoan hồng)
Although their conduct violated the law, they still have the right to be exempted if they
meet certain conditions
Stick and carrot theory: The "stick and carrot" theory is a motivational approach that
uses both rewards (the "carrot") and punishments (the "stick") to encourage desired
behavior. The "carrot" is a positive incentive, such as a bonus or promotion, while the
"stick" is a negative consequence, like a pay cut or firing. This method is often used in
management, politics, and other fields to influence people to achieve specific goals.
3.4.1 In the US
- Relive treatment applicable to parties of the cartel
- Antitrust Division's leniency program (detailed information)
- Being the first to confess - only one (Business conduct Cartel has to confess bc they
know when they do it, they have to face sanctions) (only one and the first)
- Conditions:
+ First to report cartel
+ Completely stop/cease involvement in the cartel
+ Full cooperation (provider evidence)
+ Confess the illegal conduct fully and promptly
+ The applicant must not have coerced others to join the cartel.
+ Restitution
3.4.2 In the EU
- The first to denounce the collusion agreement ->free to responsibility
- Legislation: 2006 Commission Notice on Immunity from fines and reduction of fines in
cartel cases (100 (the first)-50(the second)-30(the third)
- 3 Conditions
Full immunity (100%)

+ First undertaking to submit information on the cartel

+ Providing evidence

+ Full, continuous and prompt cooperation

Reduce immunity

30-50% (second applicant)

20-30% (third applicant)

up to 20% (subsequent applicant)
STATEMENTS
1. All horizontal anticompetitive agreements are cartels
- Incorrect
- Art 101 TFEU (bổ sung thêm CSPL ở US- sherman act)
All cartels are horizontal agreements, but not all horizontal agreements are cartels.
 Horizontal agreements involve companies at the same level of the supply chain
collaborating (e.g., competing manufacturers).
 Cartels are a subset of horizontal agreements that are considered particularly
harmful. They involve collusion between competitors to control prices,
production, or markets, which is typically illegal.

 Anti-competitive horizontal agreements, other than cartels, may be less severe and
can sometimes be permissible if they have a net positive effect on competition,
such as for R&D or production cooperation, as long as they don't fix prices, limit
output, or divide markets.

2. Horizontal agreements on boycott are per se violations of antitrust or

competition law.

- Incorrect

- 101(3) TFEU

- Horizontal agreements boycott may be applied rule of reason, not just per se
violations (competition law)

+ Person violation: cấm trong tất cả các TH

+ Rules of reason: nếu có lý do hợp lý thì vẫn dc miễn trừ

(Bổ sung thêm giải thích trong antitrust law)->Các TH được miễn trừ: Patent owners;
Labor unions and agricultural organizations; Certain activities that fall within the
scope of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

3. Vertical anti-competitive agreements are not cartels, so alwáy applied rules of

reason.

4. If parties agree about anti-competitive conduct in oral conversations, they

enter into concerted practices.

5. All franchise agreements between undertakings are exempted from

prohibitions of Art 101 TFEU

6. All agreements between small companies, together holding no more than 10%
market share are exempted from prohibitions of Art 101 TFEU

7. Purpose of leniency policy is to relieve good companies from penalties

- Incorrect
 - Art 101(3) of the TFEU; Commission Notice on Immunity from fines and reduction
of fines in cartel cases (2006)

- The purpose of leniency policy is not to relieve “good companies from penalties. A
company participating in a cartel, by definition, has engaged in severe anti-
competitive behavior (such as price-fixing or market division) and is therefore not
considered a "good company" in a legal sense. And the purpose of a leniency policy
in competition law is not to reward "good companies" but to serve as a tool to detect
and remove cartel. In the EU, this policy encourages parties to come to the authorities,
confess about the cartel and receive relief treatment (immunity or reduction in fines).

8. Leniency policy is only applied to the first person who confess about the cartel
to the authority.

- Incorrect

- Art 101(3) of the TFEU; Commission Notice on Immunity from fines and reduction
of fines in cartel cases (2006); Antitrust Division's leniency program

- In the EU, leniency policy not only applies to the first party to confess about the
cartel but also to subsequent parties (if meet the requirement)

+ The first: 100%

+ The subsequent: decrease (50-30...)

- In the US, leniency policy only applies to the first party

- The first but do not qualify requirements

PART 4: ABUSE OF DOMINANT POSITION (MONOPOLIZATION)
There is no exemption or leniency policy for this form, bc this form is very harmful
4.1 Basic concepts and rules
In the US:
- Monopolize/Attempt to monopolize
+ Section 2 Sherman Act
+ Form:
 to monopolize: monopoly power + illegal conduct
  attempt to monopolize: power closed to monopoly power + illegal conduct (the
substantial martket power is lower)
=>US antitrust law "monôplize power" - substantial market power (>50% market share)
+ durable period of time (Around 2 years)
->market entry barriers: rào cản gia nhập thị trường (prevent
potential competitors (ex: DN yêu cầu phải có số vốn cao, các yêu cầu về phương pháp,
kỹ thuật, ...)
- combine
- conspire
- among the several states
- Relevant market: thị trường liên quan
+ Product market (ex: beer and milk are not in the same product market)
->the purpose of use: drink, eat, look, get well from illness
->the characteristics: structure, physical, chemical,...(ex: beverage have gas and
without gas)
->the price: cheap, high, ...
-> SSNIP test: considers whether the suppliers/producers within the 'market' (i.e. the
market as it is defined by the proposed market definition) are able to increase the price of
Product X (i.e. the good or service which they produce or supply) without experiencing
demand-side substitution or supply-side substitution
+ S: small (5-10%)
+ S: significant
+ N: non-transitory (1 year)
+ I: Increase
+ P: price
Trả lời cho câu hỏi: If the price increases a small significant in a non-transitory, whether
the supplier are able to increase the price of product.
+ Geography market (also use the SSNIP test)
Trả lời cho câu hỏi: If the price increases a small significant in a non-transitory, whether
the consumers will go to another shop to buy that product.
Sec. 2. Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or
conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or
commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a
misdemeanor, and, on conviction thereof; shall be punished by fine not exceeding five
thousand dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by both said
punishments, in the discretion of the court.
- Purpose
- Scope
- Consequence

In the EU: abuse of dominant position (Art 102 TFEU)

+ Form: abuse of dominant position: dominant position + abuse=illegal conduct
->Difference between abuse of dominant position and monopolize (về ghi lại)
"Dominant position": substantial market power (>40%) + durable period of time (around
2 years)
->to keep the two above conditions: have to have market entry barriers
->Market power of current competitors: if a firm do not qualify substantial
market power, it still to called dominant position in some cases (VD: A (mặc dù chỉ có
30%) nhưng các công ty đối thủ khác B, C, D, ... chỉ có 1, 2% thì A vẫn được là có vị trí
thống lĩnh)
->Countervailing market power (of the other side): phải được xem xét trước
khi kết luận một DN nào đó có vị trí thống lĩnh hay không. Tức là ngoài việc xem xét
khoảng cách vị trí giữa DN với các DN khác mà còn phải xem xét bên đối kháng (VD
bên mua có vị trí thống lĩnh nhưng bên mua (1%) thì lúc này bên mua mới là bên có vị trí
thống lĩnh chứ không phải bên bán)
=>EU is more comprehensive than the US
GIẢI THÍCH: Để đánh giá một DN có vị trí thống lĩnh thị trường hay không thì ngoài
việc đáp ứng 2 điều kiện cơ bản thì DN còn phải đánh gía bởi các yếu tố khác:
+ Rào cản gia nhập thị trường: Nếu rào cản gia nhập thấp, sự gia nhập của các đối thủ
mới sẽ là một mối đe dọa đối với các doanh nghiệp hiện có, từ đó ngăn cản họ lạm dụng
sức mạnh thị trường (ví dụ: tăng giá quá mức). Ngược lại, nếu rào cản gia nhập cao, các
doanh nghiệp hiện có có thể hành xử độc lập với các đối thủ tiềm năng, khách hàng và
người tiêu dùng. Đây là yếu tố then chốt giúp xác định sự tồn tại và mức độ của vị trí
thống lĩnh theo Điều 102 TFEU.
+ Sức mạnh đối trọng của người mua: khả năng đàm phán của một hoặc một nhóm người
mua (khách hàng) đủ lớn và mạnh để hạn chế sức mạnh thị trường của nhà cung cấp,
ngay cả khi nhà cung cấp đó có thị phần cao (Người mua lớn có thể thương lượng để đạt
được mức giá thấp hơn hoặc các điều khoản thương mại tốt hơn, ngăn cản nhà cung cấp
thống lĩnh tăng giá một cách tùy tiện; Người mua có thể đe dọa chuyển sang nhà cung
cấp khác (bao gồm cả đối thủ cạnh tranh nhỏ hơn, hoặc các đối thủ tiềm năng) nếu nhà
cung cấp thống lĩnh cố gắng áp đặt các điều khoản bất lợi, ...)
+ Sức mạnh thị trường của các DN cạnh tranh hiện tại: ....

Art 102 TFEU: "..."

- Purpose: to restrain compertition to keep/improve dominant position
- Scope: between member states within the internal market or un a substaintial part of it
(một hoặc khu vực đủ để cạnh tranh, không cần phải trên toàn bộ lãnh thổ)
- Consequence: shall be prohibited (administrative violation ->administrative sanction be
applied)
4.2 Conditions for application
4.2.1 In the US
- Monololize or attempt to monopolize
- The monopolization affects trade/commerce among US states or with foreign nations
->Conduct happens in one state: does not apply
4.2.2 In the EU
- The undertaking has a dominant position in the relevant market
- The undertaking abuses that position
- The abuse affects trade bw Member states
=>US and EU do not prohibit holding dominant or monopilized position
4.3 Forms of abuse/momopolization
(Article 102(a) TFEU): Directly or indirrectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices
or other unfair trading conditions:
Example:
+ Excessive pricing: extreme unreasonable high
->How to define "extreme high"? do not compare with production expenses, but real
market value ->too complicated to define
+ Predatory pricing (định giá huỷ diệt): to kill competitors by setting unreasonable low
price, then when they get monopolized/stronge dominant posintion ->comeback to
increase the price
+ Pricing squeeze (ép giá): not all dominant firm can pricing squeeze (only intergrated
firm:
Main supplier - dominant sell product to producers (it means that producers are also
custommers)
+ Imposing unfair trading conditions (áp đặt các điều kiện thương mại không công bằng)
(Article 102(b) TFEU): Limiting production, markets or technical development to the
prejudice of consumers
- Limiting production
- Limiting markets
- Limiting technical development
(Article 102(c) TFEU): applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with
their trading ...
(Article 102(d) TFEU): Tying (case MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Sold window
system together with media entertainment software -> when custommers buy window
software, they are forced to buy media entertainment software, not form other produces.

4.4 Classification of abuses

Base on the object:
- Exploitative abusues (ex: Tying, discrimination in some case)
- Exclusionary abuses (ex: predatory pricing)
->Margin squeeze: may be both
Base on the link bw the activity and pricing
- Pricing abuses
- Other forms of abuses

United States v. Microsoft (2001) held that Microsoft unlawfully maintained its monopoly in
the market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman
Act. The court found that Microsoft possessed monopoly power, shown by its extremely high
market share and reinforced by substantial barriers to entry, especially the “applications barrier”
created by network effects and the large ecosystem of Windows-compatible software. Microsoft
engaged in exclusionary conduct designed to protect this monopoly, including contractual
restrictions on OEMs, technological and contractual strategies to disadvantage Netscape’s
browser and Java, and other practices that impeded potential platform-level competition. While
the tying claim regarding Internet Explorer was remanded for rule-of-reason analysis, the court
affirmed that Microsoft’s overall pattern of conduct unlawfully preserved its monopoly.

Michelin v Commission (1983) held that Michelin abused its dominant position in the Dutch tire
market by operating an individualized discount system that tied dealers to reaching annual sales
targets, making it difficult for them to switch to rival suppliers. The Court confirmed that
dominant undertakings have a “special responsibility” not to impair competition and found that
Michelin’s loyalty-inducing rebates—set through non-transparent, discretionary criteria—were
capable of restricting competition, even without proof of intent. The ruling established that
selective price advantages by a dominant firm are abusive when they create dependence and
foreclose competitors rather than reflecting genuine efficiencies or cost savings.

Hoffmann-La Roche v Commission (1979) is a landmark case in which the Court of Justice held
that Roche, a dominant producer of vitamins, abused its dominant position by entering into
loyalty-inducing exclusive dealing agreements with major purchasers. The Court ruled that a
dominant undertaking may not use practices that tie customers—whether through formal
exclusivity clauses or economically coercive rebates based on customers buying all or most of
their requirements from the dominant firm—because such practices foreclose competitors and
distort normal competition. The Court emphasized that dominance carries a “special
responsibility” not to undermine the competitive structure of the market, and that rebates which
are conditional on exclusivity or on purchasing the majority of requirements are inherently
abusive, regardless of proof of intent or actual anticompetitive effects.

6 CÂU TRÊN SLIDE:

2. Monopoly position in the US antitrust law has a similar meaning as dominant
position in the EU competition law
- Correct
- Link
- Somehow, the way to define "monopoly power" is different
3. Có 2 điểm sai (nhóm chỉ mới đưa ra được 1 điểm)
4. The SSNIP test is the Small and Single Natural Increase in Price test, is applied
by the authority to identify the relevant market
- Incorrect
- Not "single natural", but "significant"
6. To identify significant market power of the concerned firm/undertaking,
authorities in the US and the EU take into account only two elements: market share
and entry barriers.
- Incorrect
- Legal basis: .....
- Lack factor: a durable period of time

CHAPTER 5 MERGERS (CONCENTRATION)

5.1 Basic concepts and rules
- Concentration: two or more undertakings on a market "merge" - or one more
undertaking
Acquire control over another, or the creation of a full-function
- Conlomerate: tập đoàn đa ngành, trong đó bao gồm công ty mẹ sở hữu hoặc kiểm soát
một số công ty con hoạt động trong lĩnh vực hoàn toàn không liên quan đến nhau hoặc
chỉ liên quan rất ít.
- "Joint venture": Liên doanh
- "Mergers" (horizontal, vertical, conglomerate): sáp nhập
- "acquisition": Mua lại
- "consolidation": Hợp nhất
- "community dimension": các chính sách, hành động hoặc sáng kiến được thực hiện ở
cấp độ toàn liên minh thay vì chỉ ở cấp độ quốc gia riêng lẻ.
=>Merger: A+ B=>A or B
=>Consolidation: A + B=>C
=>Conlomerate (A ----acquire----> B ->A:parent+ B: subsidy

Classification:
"Megerrs": general (broad) concept
- Horizontal mergers (bw companies in the same industry/providing same goods/services
- bw competitors)
- Non - horizontal mergers:
+ Vertical mergers (bw companies operating in different levels within a supply's
chain/providing different goods/ services for one specific finished product)
+ Conglomerate mergers (bw companies operating in unrelated business activities) (For
ex: vingroup, novaland group, Trương Hai group, ...)

Rules: Not all activies mentioned above make harm to market

In the US:
- Mergers should be evaluated
- Mergers that create substantial efficiencies should be legal ("efficiency defense")
- Mergers should be condemned (được lên án) if they produce anticompetitive
consequences
=>Có 3 cách trả lời: Approve without condition, Approve with condition, Refusal.
=>The enforcement agencies use HHI (chỉ số đo mức độ tập trung thị trường) & market
share (thị phần) to measure market concentration (before the merger and after the
merger):
->Must notify->to be reviewed ->to be challenged or not
(Có thể hiểu đơn giản:
Tập trung = ít người chơi + doanh nghiệp lớn mạnh + ít cạnh tranh.
Phân tán = nhiều người chơi + cạnh tranh cao.
Thị trường càng tập trung → HHI càng cao.)
In the EU:
- Merger transaction, 'concentration', with a significant impediment (trở ngại) to effective
competition in the common market or a substantial part of it ...
5.2. Notification
5.2.1 In the US
Threshold of notification: (updated from February 2025, by FTC - annually, reflect
development - GNP) =>Dựa vào: Hart-Scott-Rodino (HSR) Act
- Size of transaction test: over 126.4 million USD
- If > or = 505.8 million USD (need to apply size of person test)
+ 1 person has > or = 252.9 million USD and
+ The other has > or = 25.3 million USD
- If > 505.8 million USD: without exemptions
Not based on "marker share", bc "marker share" is related to the relevant market but
Merger is hard to determine this factor; this factor must be based on statistics or data of
each Business.
5.2.2 In the EU (EUMR - EU merger regulation)
Threshold for notification: (system 1: >5 billion) ->Phải đáp ứng 2 điều kiện bên
dưới:
- The Combined aggregate worldwide turnover: >5 billion (tổng doanh thu toàn cầu kết
hợp)
AND
- The aggregate community-wide turnover of each of at least two of the undertakings
concerted >EUR 250 million, unless each of the undertakings concerted achieves more
than two-thirds of its aggregate community-wide turnover within one and the same
member state
Another Threshold for notification (system 2: <5 billion) ->phải đáp ứng các điều
kiện bên dưới:
(a) The Combined aggregate worldwide turnover of all the undertakings concerted is
more than 2.5 billion EUR.
(b) Tại ít nhất 3 Quốc gia thành viên, tổng doanh thu (của tất cả các bên) > 100 triệu EUR
mỗi nước (VD Pháp: tổng A+B = 120 triệu >100)
(c) Ở ít nhất 3 Quốc gia đó, doanh thu của mỗi bên (A và B) tại mỗi nước phải > 25 triệu
EUR (VD Pháp: A = 70 triệu, B = 50 triệu → cả hai >25)
(d) Doanh thu tại EU của ít nhất 2 doanh nghiệp (ở đây ta có 2 DN là A và B) > 100 triệu
EUR (VD A = 300 triệu, B = 180 triệu → cả hai >100)
Ngoại lệ: Nếu mỗi trong hai doanh nghiệp có hơn 2/3 doanh thu EU của mình tập trung
tại cùng một quốc gia thành viên, thì thương vụ không có "EU dimension" (không phải
nộp EC), vì đơn giản thương vụ mang tính quốc gia. (Lưu ý: 2/3 phải là của từng doanh
nghiệp và phải ở cùng một Member State cho cả hai doanh nghiệp)

Related period of time

In the US
In the EU
HHI (to measure market concentration before and after merger)
A: 30%
B: 20%
C: 10%
D: 40%
=>A^2+B^2+C^2+D^2=3000 (total number of square market shares)
If A&C (merger) =>(30+10)^2+20^2+40^2=3.600 =>Oligopoly (nhóm độc quyền)

If there's a lot of competitors (10 competitors=100%)

Tính bình phương tương tự như trên: 1342 =>somewhat competitive
If B&C merger=>1.451=>still somewhat competitive
NHẬN ĐỊNH
1. Mergers are classified into two groups: horizontal mergers and vertical mergers
- Incorrect
There are two main groups:
- Horizontal mergers
- Non-horizontal mergers:
+ Vertical mergers
+ Conglomerate mergers
2. The process of any merger is from acquisition to consolidation
- Incorrect
- Legal basis:
- Merger:
- Acquisition: A: acquiring company control rights over another company by buying
shares or assets of the acquired company ->After: these 2 companies are 2 separate
companies (occurs a new relationship: A(parent), B(subsidiary)
- Consolidation: a special type of merger where 2 or more company combine their share
or assets to establish a new bigger company (these 2 companies terminate)
3. The main threshold for merger notification in the US and the EU is combined
aggregate market share
- Incorrect
- Not based on "marker share", bc "marker share" is related to the relevant market but
Merger is hard to determine this factor; this factor must be based on statistics or data of
each Business.
- Bằng cách khác (...)
4. Horizontal mergers that break the thréhold are per-se prohibited (of course)
- Incorrect
Ex1: câu 1
Ex3
Ex4: all
Ex5,7,9

SỬA NHẬN ĐINHK

In the US:
12.
- Incorrect
- Almost all cases have to qualify the condition to have more than 50%
- Hỏi lại group 2 :)))
14.
- Correct
In the EU
2.
- Incorrect
- TFEU does not provide the concept "UNDERTAKING."
->the interpretation in the judgment of the Court of Justice
4.
- Incorrect
- Hỏi lại Khánh Nguyên
6.
- Correct
- Legal basis: The Minimish Notice
- Trích nội dung của The minimish notice zô