Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 2, 179 - 208, 10.12.2024

Ahmet Buğra Aydın

Abstract

Bu makalede, rekabet hukukunda yıkıcı fiyatlama kavramı ve bu kavramın hukuki niteliği ele alınmaktadır. Yıkıcı fiyatlama, kısa vadede tüketicilere düşük fiyat avantajı sağlasa da, uzun vadede rekabetin azalması ve fiyatların yükselmesi nedeniyle tüketicilere zarar verebilecek bir strateji olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Makalede, yıkıcı fiyatlamanın tanımı, unsurları ve tespit yöntemleri incelenmektedir. Ayrıca, ABD, Avrupa Birliği ve Türk rekabet hukuku uygulamaları karşılaştırmalı olarak ele alınmakta ve yıkıcı fiyatlamanın tespiti için hangi kriterlerinin kullanılabileceği tartışılmaktadır. Sonuç bölümünde ise, yıkıcı fiyatlamanın tespitinin ve önlenmesinin rekabetin korunması ve tüketici refahının artırılması açısından önemi vurgulanmaktadır.

Keywords

Competition law abuse of dominance predatory pricing predatory pricing test.

References

  • Areeda, Phillip; Turner, Donald F., “Predatory Pricing and Related Practices under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,” Harvard Law Review 88, no. 4, 1975.
  • Baumol, William J. “Principles Relevant to Predatory Pricing.” İç. The Pros and Cons of Low Prices.
  • Brodley, Joseph F., “The Economic Goals of Antitrust: Efficiency, Consumer Welfare, And Technological Progress,” New York University Law Review 62, No. 5, 1987.
  • Çeçen, Halil, Avrupa Birliği ve Türk Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Fiyat Uygulamaları ile Kötüye Kullanılması, İstanbul, Legal Yayıncılık, 2018.
  • Christopher Leslie, “Revisiting the Revisionist History of Standard Oil,” Southern California Law Review 85, 2013, s. 573–604.
  • Dalton J; Esposito L., “Predatory Price Cutting and Standard Oil: A Re-examination of the Trial Record,” in Research in Law and Economics - A Journal of Policy, Research in Law and Economics (Elsevier, 2007), s.168–187. • David Bailey; Laura E. John, Bellamy & Child: European Union Law of Competition, New York Ny, Oxford University Press, 2018.
  • Dobson, Paul; Waterson, Michael; Chu, Alex, “The Welfare Consequences of the Exercise of Buyer Power: Office of Fair Trading Research Paper 16.” Office of Fair Trading, 1998. Last modified 1998.
  • Ekdi, Barışi Gümrük Birliǧi Çerçevesinde Damping ve Yıkıcı Fiyat Uygulamaları, Uzmanlık Tezleri Serisi No 7. Ankara, Rekabet Kurumu, 2003.
  • European Commission. Guidance on the Commission’s Enforcement Priorities in Applying Article 82 of the EC Treaty to Abusive Exclusionary Conduct by Dominant Undertakings, 2009. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=C ELEX:52009XC0224(01)&from=EN.
  • Faull, Jonathan; Nikpay Ali, Faull & Nikpay the EC law of competition. 2nd ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007.
  • Fox, Eleanor M., “US and EU Competition Law: A Comparison.”, 1999.
  • Glazer, Kenneth L. “Predatory Prıcıng And Beyond: Lıfe After Brooke Group”, Antitrust Law Journal 62, no. 3, 1994, s.605–33. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40843253.
  • Güçer, Sülün, Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması Çerçevesinde Sınai Mülkiyet Hakları. 1st ed. Rekabet Kurumu yayın no. 0185. Lisansüstü tez serisi; no. XIII., Ankara, Rekabet Kurumu, 2005.
  • Hemphill, C. S. “The Role of Recoupment in Predatory Pricing Analyses.” Stanford Law Review 53, no. 6, 2001, https://doi.org/10.2307/1229551.
  • Hemphill, C. Scott; Philip J. Weiser; “Beyond Brooke Group: Bringing Reality to the Law of Predatory Pricing.” Yale Law Journal 127, no. 7, 2018, s.2048–77.
  • Hovenkamp, Herbert J, “Is Antitrust’s Consumer Welfare Principle Imperiled?” Journal of Corporation Law 45, s.101–30.
  • Hovenkamp, Herbert J, “Post-Chicago Antitrist: A Review and Critique.” Columbia Business Law Review, no. 2, 2001, s.257–338.
  • Howarth, David. “Unfair and Predatory Pricing under Article 82 EC: From Cost-Price Comparisons to the Search for Strategic Standards.” İç. EC competition law: A Critical Assessment / general editors, Giuliano Amato and Claus-Dieter Ehlermann ;associate editor, Assimakis Komninos. Edited by Giuliano Amato and Claus-Dieter Ehlermann,. Oxford: Hart, 2007, s.249–95.
  • Jones, Alison; B. E. Sufrin, EU Competition Law: Text, Cases, and Materials / Alison Jones, Solicitor, Professor of Law, King’s College London and Brenda Sufrin, Solicitor, Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Bristol. Oxford, United Kingdom, New York, Oxford University Press, 2016.
  • Kara, Alper F. Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması Aracı Olarak Yıkıcı Fiyat Uygulaması: ABD ve AT Uygulamalarından Dersler, Yayın No 100, Uzmanlık Tezleri Serisi, No. 18. Ankara: Rekabet Kurumu, 2003.
  • Kareff, Scott M. “Tetra Pak International Sa V. Commission (Tetra Pak II): the European Approach to Monopoly Leveraging Recent Development.” Law and Policy in International Business, no. 2, 1997, s.549–74.
  • Kısa, Seda U., Avrupa Topluluğu Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Rekabet Karşıtı Eylem ve İşlemlerle Kötüye Kullanılması, Yayın No 408. Ankara, Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü, 2004.
  • Leslie, Christopher, “Predatory Pricing and Recoupment”, Columbia Law Review 113, 2013, s.1695–1771.
  • Monti, Giorgio, “The Concept of Dominance in Article 82.” European Competition Journal 2, sup, 2006, s.31–52.
  • O’Donoghue, Robert; Padilla, A. J., The Law and Economics of Article 102 TFEU, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2013.
  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. “Predatory Pricing.” 1989.
  • Öz, Gamze A. Avrupa Topluluğu ve Türk Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması. Yayın No: 51. Ankara: Rekabet Kurumu, 2000.
  • Öztunalı, Aydın, Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması. Ankara: Seçkin, 2014.
  • Rekabet Kurumu, Hâkim Durumdaki Teşebbüslerin Dışlayıcı Davranışlarına İlişkin Kılavuz: Hâkim Durum Kılavuzu, 2014.
  • Snelders, Robbert; Andrew Leyden; Lofaro, Andrea, “Predatory Conduct.” iç. EU Competition Law: Abuse of Dominance Under Article 102 TFEU. Edited by Francisco E. Gonzalez-Diaz and Robbert Snelders. 5, 159–227. Claeys & Casteels Publishing, 2013.
  • Uzunallı, Sevilay, “Avrupa Birliği Rekabet Hukuku Işığında Yıkıcı Fiyat Uygulamaları ile Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması”, Rekabet Dergisi 11, no. 4, 2010, s.59–110.
  • van den Bergh, Roger; Camesasca, Peter D., European Competition Law and Economics: A Comparative Perspective / Roger Van den Bergh and Peter Camesasca. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2006.
  • Weber Waller, Spencer, “The Omega Man or the Isolation of U.S. Antitrust Law.” Connecticut Law Review 52, no. 1, 2020, s.123–212.
  • Whish, Richard, Competition Law. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
  • Wurmnest, Wolfgang, ed. Structure and effects in EU competition law: Studies on exclusionary conduct and state aid / edited by Jürgen Basedow, Wolfgang Wurmnest. Translated by Jürgen Basedow. International competition law series v. 47. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer; Biggleswade: Turpin Distribution Services, 2011.

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 2, 179 - 208, 10.12.2024

Ahmet Buğra Aydın

Abstract

References

  • Areeda, Phillip; Turner, Donald F., “Predatory Pricing and Related Practices under Section 2 of the Sherman Act,” Harvard Law Review 88, no. 4, 1975.
  • Baumol, William J. “Principles Relevant to Predatory Pricing.” İç. The Pros and Cons of Low Prices.
  • Brodley, Joseph F., “The Economic Goals of Antitrust: Efficiency, Consumer Welfare, And Technological Progress,” New York University Law Review 62, No. 5, 1987.
  • Çeçen, Halil, Avrupa Birliği ve Türk Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Fiyat Uygulamaları ile Kötüye Kullanılması, İstanbul, Legal Yayıncılık, 2018.
  • Christopher Leslie, “Revisiting the Revisionist History of Standard Oil,” Southern California Law Review 85, 2013, s. 573–604.
  • Dalton J; Esposito L., “Predatory Price Cutting and Standard Oil: A Re-examination of the Trial Record,” in Research in Law and Economics - A Journal of Policy, Research in Law and Economics (Elsevier, 2007), s.168–187. • David Bailey; Laura E. John, Bellamy & Child: European Union Law of Competition, New York Ny, Oxford University Press, 2018.
  • Dobson, Paul; Waterson, Michael; Chu, Alex, “The Welfare Consequences of the Exercise of Buyer Power: Office of Fair Trading Research Paper 16.” Office of Fair Trading, 1998. Last modified 1998.
  • Ekdi, Barışi Gümrük Birliǧi Çerçevesinde Damping ve Yıkıcı Fiyat Uygulamaları, Uzmanlık Tezleri Serisi No 7. Ankara, Rekabet Kurumu, 2003.
  • European Commission. Guidance on the Commission’s Enforcement Priorities in Applying Article 82 of the EC Treaty to Abusive Exclusionary Conduct by Dominant Undertakings, 2009. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=C ELEX:52009XC0224(01)&from=EN.
  • Faull, Jonathan; Nikpay Ali, Faull & Nikpay the EC law of competition. 2nd ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007.
  • Fox, Eleanor M., “US and EU Competition Law: A Comparison.”, 1999.
  • Glazer, Kenneth L. “Predatory Prıcıng And Beyond: Lıfe After Brooke Group”, Antitrust Law Journal 62, no. 3, 1994, s.605–33. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40843253.
  • Güçer, Sülün, Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması Çerçevesinde Sınai Mülkiyet Hakları. 1st ed. Rekabet Kurumu yayın no. 0185. Lisansüstü tez serisi; no. XIII., Ankara, Rekabet Kurumu, 2005.
  • Hemphill, C. S. “The Role of Recoupment in Predatory Pricing Analyses.” Stanford Law Review 53, no. 6, 2001, https://doi.org/10.2307/1229551.
  • Hemphill, C. Scott; Philip J. Weiser; “Beyond Brooke Group: Bringing Reality to the Law of Predatory Pricing.” Yale Law Journal 127, no. 7, 2018, s.2048–77.
  • Hovenkamp, Herbert J, “Is Antitrust’s Consumer Welfare Principle Imperiled?” Journal of Corporation Law 45, s.101–30.
  • Hovenkamp, Herbert J, “Post-Chicago Antitrist: A Review and Critique.” Columbia Business Law Review, no. 2, 2001, s.257–338.
  • Howarth, David. “Unfair and Predatory Pricing under Article 82 EC: From Cost-Price Comparisons to the Search for Strategic Standards.” İç. EC competition law: A Critical Assessment / general editors, Giuliano Amato and Claus-Dieter Ehlermann ;associate editor, Assimakis Komninos. Edited by Giuliano Amato and Claus-Dieter Ehlermann,. Oxford: Hart, 2007, s.249–95.
  • Jones, Alison; B. E. Sufrin, EU Competition Law: Text, Cases, and Materials / Alison Jones, Solicitor, Professor of Law, King’s College London and Brenda Sufrin, Solicitor, Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Bristol. Oxford, United Kingdom, New York, Oxford University Press, 2016.
  • Kara, Alper F. Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması Aracı Olarak Yıkıcı Fiyat Uygulaması: ABD ve AT Uygulamalarından Dersler, Yayın No 100, Uzmanlık Tezleri Serisi, No. 18. Ankara: Rekabet Kurumu, 2003.
  • Kareff, Scott M. “Tetra Pak International Sa V. Commission (Tetra Pak II): the European Approach to Monopoly Leveraging Recent Development.” Law and Policy in International Business, no. 2, 1997, s.549–74.
  • Kısa, Seda U., Avrupa Topluluğu Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Rekabet Karşıtı Eylem ve İşlemlerle Kötüye Kullanılması, Yayın No 408. Ankara, Banka ve Ticaret Hukuku Araştırma Enstitüsü, 2004.
  • Leslie, Christopher, “Predatory Pricing and Recoupment”, Columbia Law Review 113, 2013, s.1695–1771.
  • Monti, Giorgio, “The Concept of Dominance in Article 82.” European Competition Journal 2, sup, 2006, s.31–52.
  • O’Donoghue, Robert; Padilla, A. J., The Law and Economics of Article 102 TFEU, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2013.
  • Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. “Predatory Pricing.” 1989.
  • Öz, Gamze A. Avrupa Topluluğu ve Türk Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması. Yayın No: 51. Ankara: Rekabet Kurumu, 2000.
  • Öztunalı, Aydın, Rekabet Hukukunda Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması. Ankara: Seçkin, 2014.
  • Rekabet Kurumu, Hâkim Durumdaki Teşebbüslerin Dışlayıcı Davranışlarına İlişkin Kılavuz: Hâkim Durum Kılavuzu, 2014.
  • Snelders, Robbert; Andrew Leyden; Lofaro, Andrea, “Predatory Conduct.” iç. EU Competition Law: Abuse of Dominance Under Article 102 TFEU. Edited by Francisco E. Gonzalez-Diaz and Robbert Snelders. 5, 159–227. Claeys & Casteels Publishing, 2013.
  • Uzunallı, Sevilay, “Avrupa Birliği Rekabet Hukuku Işığında Yıkıcı Fiyat Uygulamaları ile Hâkim Durumun Kötüye Kullanılması”, Rekabet Dergisi 11, no. 4, 2010, s.59–110.
  • van den Bergh, Roger; Camesasca, Peter D., European Competition Law and Economics: A Comparative Perspective / Roger Van den Bergh and Peter Camesasca. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2006.
  • Weber Waller, Spencer, “The Omega Man or the Isolation of U.S. Antitrust Law.” Connecticut Law Review 52, no. 1, 2020, s.123–212.
  • Whish, Richard, Competition Law. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
  • Wurmnest, Wolfgang, ed. Structure and effects in EU competition law: Studies on exclusionary conduct and state aid / edited by Jürgen Basedow, Wolfgang Wurmnest. Translated by Jürgen Basedow. International competition law series v. 47. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer; Biggleswade: Turpin Distribution Services, 2011.
There are 35 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Law in Context (Other)
Journal Section Private Law
Authors

Ahmet Buğra Aydın 0009-0001-2275-3930

Early Pub Date August 25, 2024
Publication Date December 10, 2024
Submission Date May 30, 2024
Acceptance Date June 11, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 11 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Aydın, A. B. (2024). REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA. İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 179-208.
AMA Aydın AB. REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA. IMUFLR. December 2024;11(2):179-208.
Chicago Aydın, Ahmet Buğra. “REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA”. İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 11, no. 2 (December 2024): 179-208.
EndNote Aydın AB (December 1, 2024) REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA. İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 11 2 179–208.
IEEE A. B. Aydın, “REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA”, IMUFLR, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 179–208, 2024.
ISNAD Aydın, Ahmet Buğra. “REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA”. İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 11/2 (December 2024), 179-208.
JAMA Aydın AB. REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA. IMUFLR. 2024;11:179–208.
MLA Aydın, Ahmet Buğra. “REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA”. İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 11, no. 2, 2024, pp. 179-08.
Vancouver Aydın AB. REKABET HUKUKUNDA YIKICI FİYATLAMA. IMUFLR. 2024;11(2):179-208.
 Download Cover Image