Page 30 - COMPETITION LAW_Flip

30

SINGLE-FIRM CONDUCT

Ademir Antonio Pereira Jr.
Yan Villela Vieira

In addition to the cases regarding the intersection between IP and antitrust
discussed above, CADE also concluded several single-firm conduct investigations in both
“traditional” and “innovative” markets. We present a brief analysis of each of the most important
single-firm conduct cases in this chapter.
At the outset, it is relevant to note that CADE is increasingly concerned
with markets characterized by vertical integration. In the agency’s view, there are situations
where players holding dominant positions in a given market may carry out varied conducts
to block rivals’ access or increase barriers to entry in vertically integrated markets even if
they do not control assets that could be strictly characterized as essential facilities. CADE’s
repeated concerns with the banking and payment industries seem to be based on a skeptical
view of the benefits arising from vertical integration, leading to several inquiries targeting
conducts like refusal to deal, tie-in, etc.
While CADE has been constantly showing concerns with potential impacts of
the vertical integration, it has not developed a comprehensible theory to support such concerns.
Most cases have been solved with the signature of Cease and Desist Agreements, avoiding the
need of more detailed decisions.

Booking.com, Decolar.com and Expedia: MFN clauses in online platforms

In March, online travel agencies Booking.com, Decolar.com and Expedia
settled CADE’s investigation for their use of Most Favored Nation (MFN) clauses in agreements
with hotels . Similar to investigations in other jurisdictions, CADE looked into whether the
11
adoption of MFN clauses in contracts with big hotel chains could harm competition.

11 See Preparatory Proceeding no.
08700.005679/2016-13.