Los acuerdos colusorios verticales de fijación de precios mínimos de reventa como práctica anticompetitiva en el sistema jurídico peruano
Date
2023-11-23
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
La presente investigación tiene como objeto establecer parámetros generales que, bajo
la regla de la razón, permita a los stakeholders (empresas y agencia de competencia)
realizar una mejor ponderación entre los efectos procompetitivos y anticompetitivos que
puede presentar la fijación de precios mínimos de reventa en el mercado, de tal forma
que se realice una mejor toma de decisiones.
La investigación se apoya en artículos, ensayos y jurisprudencia comparada sobre el
tema (método dogmático, funcional y comparado), desde la jurisprudencia y doctrina de
Estados Unidos de América, la Unión Europea y los países latinoamericanos como
Colombia, Brasil, Uruguay, Chile y Argentina. Ello, complementado con una encuesta
dirigida a abogados y economistas en el Perú especialistas en Libre Competencia.
Las conclusiones de la presente tesis permiten evidenciar que la ausencia de criterios
generales es un factor importante que explica la razón por la que no han existido casos
sobre fijación de precios mínimos de reventa. En ese sentido, la investigación concluye
estableciendo parámetros para que la agencia de competencia peruana: (i) determine
la existencia de indicios razonables que justifiquen el inicio de un procedimiento
sancionador (tres niveles de análisis más factores adicionales); y, (ii) pueda determinar
si la práctica es sancionable.
A la par, estos criterios también se presentan a modo de matriz de riesgos, a fin de que
sean implementados por las empresas en sus respectivos programas de cumplimiento
normativo en Libre Competencia.
The purpose of this research is to establish some general parameters, under the rule of reason, in a way that stakeholders (companies and the Peruvian competition agency) can carry out a better weighing between the pro-competitive and anti-competitive effects of resale price maintenance. This could improve the decision-making in those cases. The research is based on articles, essays and jurisprudence (dogmatic, functional and comparative methods) from USA, European Unión and Latin American countries such as Colombia, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile and Argentina. This is complemented by a survey addressed to lawyers and economists in Peru specialized in antitrust law. The conclusion of this thesis shows that the absence of a general criteria is an important factor that explains why there were zero cases regarding resale price maintenance. In this sense, this investigation establishes suitable parameters so that the Peruvian competition agency: (i) can assess the existence of some evidence that justify the initiation of a procedure (three levels of analysis and plus factors); and (ii) can determine if RPM is an illegal practice in each case. At the same time, these criteria are also presented as a risk matrix in a way that firms can implement it in their antitrust compliance programs.
The purpose of this research is to establish some general parameters, under the rule of reason, in a way that stakeholders (companies and the Peruvian competition agency) can carry out a better weighing between the pro-competitive and anti-competitive effects of resale price maintenance. This could improve the decision-making in those cases. The research is based on articles, essays and jurisprudence (dogmatic, functional and comparative methods) from USA, European Unión and Latin American countries such as Colombia, Brazil, Uruguay, Chile and Argentina. This is complemented by a survey addressed to lawyers and economists in Peru specialized in antitrust law. The conclusion of this thesis shows that the absence of a general criteria is an important factor that explains why there were zero cases regarding resale price maintenance. In this sense, this investigation establishes suitable parameters so that the Peruvian competition agency: (i) can assess the existence of some evidence that justify the initiation of a procedure (three levels of analysis and plus factors); and (ii) can determine if RPM is an illegal practice in each case. At the same time, these criteria are also presented as a risk matrix in a way that firms can implement it in their antitrust compliance programs.
Description
Keywords
Precios--Legislación--Perú, Libre competencia--Legislación--Perú, Precios--Legislación--Estados Unidos, Trusts--Jurisprudencia--Perú
Citation
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess