Single and continuous infringement
Before this blog is flooded with the zeitgeist debates on the Post Denmark II Judgment issued this morning (the good news for Pablo is that all his previous posts on the subject remain valid…), here are the slides (in Spanish, sorry) that I used this morning for my intervention at the Spanish Competition Authority, as announced in my previous post:
Infracción única y continuada- Alfonso Lamadrid
(Many thanks to Paloma Lantero for the help in preparing them)
Chillin'Competition 
Let me start the flood my good friend :). The culture of cutting the baby in half it is. I find some interesting things in it. The more econ approach is no walking dead. We have effects language all over the judgment, efficiency defense confirmed, no principled ruling out of AEC test (a tool), theory of anticompetitive leveraging of non contestable to contestable share is there, and recognition that objective capacity is likelihood-charged. Sure, de minimis gets definitely rejected, but at the same time, Court says that the market coverage of the practice ” constitute a useful indication as to the extent of that practice and its impact on the market”. Auspicious.
Nicolas Petit
6 October 2015 at 2:10 pm