On 7 June 2018, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) set aside the UK Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA”)’s finding that that Flynn and Pfizer had committed an abuse of dominant position by charging excessive prices for an anti-epileptic drug (phenytoin sodium capsules). Importantly, the CAT decided that the CMA erred in its reliance on the “Cost Plus” approach to determine whether prices were excessive and misapplied the United Brands test. In particular, the CAT found that the CMA “did not appropriately consider what was the right economic value of the Pfizer-Flynn Capsules” and “did not take sufficient account of the situation of other, comparable products”.
CRA Vice President Raphaël De Coninck acted as Flynn’s economic expert. He submitted written economic evidence to the Tribunal, and was cross-examined during the appeal proceedings in front of the CAT. The CRA team advising Flynn also included Elina Koustoumpardi, Mikaël Hervé and Roman Fischer.
To view the judgment, click here.
The economics and global implications of the French Google decision in ad tech
In this new episode of Antitrust Code by Concurrences, Mikaël Hervé explains the economics and global implications of the French Google decision in ad...