Question 1

Under the European Commission's block exemption, the parties whose agreements fall under certain exempted categories only have to seek de minimis approval for their transactions to be considered exempt under competition law.

Accepted Answer

Under the European Commission's block exemption regulations, agreements that fall within certain exempted categories are automatically considered exempt from the prohibition on anti-competitive agreements without the need for any approval process, including de minimis approval.

Question 2

The analytical framework established by American antitrust law distinguishes between actions that are wrong per se and actions to which the rule of reason applies.

Accepted Answer

This is a correct statement. Antitrust law considers some actions to be inherently wrong, while others require examination of their overall impact on the market using the rule of reason analysis.

Question 3

The form of antitrust laws are enacted based on the particular circumstances of each nation and therefore are not uniform.

Accepted Answer

Antitrust laws are enacted by individual nations in response to their unique economic and political situations, and therefore the form of these laws can vary significantly from country to country.

Question 4

Antitrust laws have been enacted in all of the WTO members after World War II.

Accepted Answer

While antitrust laws have been enacted in many WTO members, it is not true that they have been enacted in all of them. Some countries, such as China, have only recently begun implementing antitrust laws.

Question 5

Through what is called a block exemption, the European Commission grants an automatic competition exemption to a variety of different types of transactions and agreements.

Accepted Answer

The statement is true. The block exemption allows automatic competition exemption for certain types of transactions and agreements.

Question 6

The Airtours v. Commissioner of European Communities case involved the question of whether a merger between two members of the oligopoly in the short haul segment of the airline industry would create a "collective dominant" business firm.

Accepted Answer

The Airtours v. Commissioner of European Communities case involved the question of whether a merger between two members of the oligopoly in the short haul segment of the airline industry would create a "collective dominant" business firm.

Question 7

In the Hartford Fire Insurance Co. case, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that it could not assert jurisdiction over European companies in competition matters unless the companies had a direct physical presence in a U.S. state.

Accepted Answer

In the Hartford Fire Insurance Co. case, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that it could assert jurisdiction over European companies in competition matters if they had a "sufficiently substantial" effect on U.S. commerce, regardless of whether they had a direct physical presence in a U.S. state.

Question 8

Foreign competition law is similar in substance are modeled after American antitrust law and similar in the sanctions for violating the law.

Accepted Answer

Foreign competition law varies across different countries and regions, and while some may have similarities with American antitrust law, they are not modeled after it. Additionally, the sanctions for violating foreign competition laws may differ from those in the United States.

Question 9

European courts addressing a patent issue are generally more favorable to patent holders than U.S. courts.

Accepted Answer

European courts, particularly in patent litigation, are often seen as less favorable to patent holders than U.S. courts due to stricter patentability criteria and enforcement standards, as well as differences in litigation processes and damages awards.

Question 10

The Tetra Laval BV v. Commission of the European Communities case applied correctly the "leveraging" theory in the rejection of the merger of Tetra Laval and Sidel that would horizontally and vertically dominate the plastic bottle plugs industry.

Accepted Answer

The Tetra Laval BV v. Commission case primarily concerned the acquisition of Sidel by Tetra Laval, focusing on the markets for packaging equipment and packaging materials, not specifically on "plastic bottle plugs." The Court of First Instance (now the General Court) annulled the Commission's decision to block the merger, finding the Commission had not sufficiently demonstrated that Tetra Laval would be able to leverage its dominant position in the carton packaging market into the PET (plastic) bottle market. The case is notable for its discussion on the difficulty of proving leveraging in merger cases, rather than a focus on dominating the plastic bottle plugs industry.

Question 11

The antitrust laws of the European countries developed much earlier and were the model for the antitrust legislation in the United States.

Accepted Answer

The antitrust laws in the United States developed earlier, with the Sherman Antitrust Act passed in 1890. The European countries followed with their own antitrust legislation afterwards.

Question 12

The European Union's competition law exemption system functions very much like the American antitrust law rule of reason.

Accepted Answer

Both the EU's competition law exemption system and the American antitrust law rule of reason involve a balancing test that considers the pro-competitive benefits and anti-competitive effects of a particular agreement or conduct. Therefore, they function in a similar way.

Question 13

Prohibitions against agreements that restrict competition in the United States by the Justice Department are reviewed in the context of determining such an arrangement would enhance or inhibit a competitive market place.

Accepted Answer

This statement is true. The Justice Department reviews agreements that restrict competition in order to determine if they would enhance or inhibit a competitive market place.

Question 14

Antitrust law in the European Union are implemented by the Commission of the European Communities and are known as competition law.

Accepted Answer

Antitrust law in the European Union is implemented by the Commission of the European Communities and is known as competition law.

Question 15

The U.S. has an analogous system to the European Union's system for resolving antitrust law issues prior to the transaction taking place.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The U.S. has an analogous system to...

Question 16

The European Union's sophisticated antitrust law is based on and implemented through Article 1 and Article 2 of the Clayton Act.

Accepted Answer

The European Union's antitrust law is based on and implemented through Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), not the Clayton Act.

Question 17

The Europeans have structured their system to provide for resolution of competition law issues after the transaction has taken place, typically through litigation.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The Europeans have structured their system to...

Question 18

The European Parliament has criticized the European Commission for its flexible approach in the granting of block exemptions from normal competition rules for vertical agreements.

Accepted Answer

The answer of The European Parliament has criticized the European...

Question 19

Du e t o th e fac t tha t foreig n competitio n la w violation s offe r few , i f any , damag e awards , ther e i s ver y littl e private litigation.

Accepted Answer

The statement is true, as foreign competition law violations rarely result in damage awards, which leads to very little private litigation.

Question 20

In smaller countries, there tends to be a relatively lower tolerance for market domination.

Accepted Answer

In smaller countries, market domination by a few firms is often more tolerated due to the limited size of the market, which can support only a few players efficiently.

Quiz 21: Regulating the Competitive Environment

Under the European Commission's block exemption, the parties whose agreements fall under certain exempted categories only have to seek de minimis approval for their transactions to be considered exempt under competition law.

The analytical framework established by American antitrust law distinguishes between actions that are wrong per se and actions to which the rule of reason applies.

The form of antitrust laws are enacted based on the particular circumstances of each nation and therefore are not uniform.

Antitrust laws have been enacted in all of the WTO members after World War II.

Through what is called a block exemption, the European Commission grants an automatic competition exemption to a variety of different types of transactions and agreements.

The Airtours v. Commissioner of European Communities case involved the question of whether a merger between two members of the oligopoly in the short haul segment of the airline industry would create a "collective dominant" business firm.

In the Hartford Fire Insurance Co. case, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that it could not assert jurisdiction over European companies in competition matters unless the companies had a direct physical presence in a U.S. state.

Foreign competition law is similar in substance are modeled after American antitrust law and similar in the sanctions for violating the law.

European courts addressing a patent issue are generally more favorable to patent holders than U.S. courts.

The Tetra Laval BV v. Commission of the European Communities case applied correctly the "leveraging" theory in the rejection of the merger of Tetra Laval and Sidel that would horizontally and vertically dominate the plastic bottle plugs industry.

The antitrust laws of the European countries developed much earlier and were the model for the antitrust legislation in the United States.

The European Union's competition law exemption system functions very much like the American antitrust law rule of reason.

Prohibitions against agreements that restrict competition in the United States by the Justice Department are reviewed in the context of determining such an arrangement would enhance or inhibit a competitive market place.

Antitrust law in the European Union are implemented by the Commission of the European Communities and are known as competition law.

The U.S. has an analogous system to the European Union's system for resolving antitrust law issues prior to the transaction taking place.

The European Union's sophisticated antitrust law is based on and implemented through Article 1 and Article 2 of the Clayton Act.

The Europeans have structured their system to provide for resolution of competition law issues after the transaction has taken place, typically through litigation.

The European Parliament has criticized the European Commission for its flexible approach in the granting of block exemptions from normal competition rules for vertical agreements.

Du e t o th e fac t tha t foreig n competitio n la w violation s offe r few , i f any , damag e awards , ther e i s ver y littl e private litigation.

In smaller countries, there tends to be a relatively lower tolerance for market domination.