Not exact matches
Regulators around the world are fining or investigating Qualcomm, supporting elements
of Apple's
claims in a lawsuit alleging Qualcomm
abuses its
dominant position in mobile chips.
Its decision not to investigate
claims Fonterra was
abusing its
dominant position to keep prices artificially high, followed a similar «no worries» verdict delivered recently by the Australian Consumer and Competition over pricing practices
of mega-retailer Coles.
The directive's aim is to make it easier for consumers and businesses to
claim for loss caused by cartel and concerted practices or
abuse of dominant market place
positions.
Not surprisingly, this leads to conflicts between those independents and manufacturers
of appliances, because
of the intellectual property rights over the machinery and consumables (e.g. generic producers offering coffee pads compatible with Nespresso [1]-- and Senseo [2]- coffee machines and contesting the IP - rights in question, or — in the alternative —
claiming that the refusal to license the IP - right is an
abuse of a
dominant position [3]-RRB- and associated litigation (e.g. the Toshiba / Katun - case over advertisement
of generic consumables which referred to the brand
of the machinery).
The rule changes ushered in by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, which came into force in October 2015, should result in an increase in
claims arising out
of infringement
of competition law (for example damages
claims relating to cartels, anti-competitive agreements, or
abuse of a
dominant market
position).