Case studies

"It really is saving us a huge number of hours over the days, weeks and months. Having more relevant support at hand, not having to draft or review documents them from scratch - it all adds up."

Southampton FC

Access all 7 documents on Excessive pricing

GET ACCESS NOW

GLOSSARY

Excessive pricing definition

Published by a LexisNexis Competition expert

What does Excessive pricing mean?

dominant firms can abuse their position by charging a price which is excessive because it has no reasonable relation to the economic value of the product supplied.

The concept of excessive pricing is controversial for many reasons not least it may require the competition law authority to become something of a price regulator, and also because there is no clear method to calculate the 'economic value' of a product. EU and UK case law has tended only to find excessive pricing abusive when other conduct, such as discriminatory pricing, is also present. It is very difficult to prove excessive pricing is abusive, and therefore a breach of Article 102 TFEU and/or section 18 of the Competition Act 1998, as a stand alone offence.

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Türkiye behavioural investigations—closed cases tracker

Türkiye behavioural investigations—closed cases tracker This table summarises all completed investigations by Türkiyes competition authority (the Turkish Competition Authority—the TCA) into alleged cartels, anti-competitive agreements and abuses of dominant positions since 2018. Note—only investigations that have been made public are included in this table. 2025 Investigations under Article 4 of Law No. 4054 Case name, companies under investigation and industry Issues Developments Production and sale of cement and ready-mixed concrete• Batıbeton Sanayi AŞ• Öztürk Ticaret • Şölen Çimento Yapı İnş. San. ve Tic. Ltd. Şti• Çimentaş İzmir Çimento Fabrikası Türk AŞ Restrictive agreements—price fixing and customer allocation • Infringement decision announced—27/05/2025; fines totalling TRY 42,401,366 imposed Elevator maintenance• 14 undertakings (listed here) Restrictive agreements—price fixing and customer allocation •Infringement decision announced—28/01/25; fines totalling TRY 418,391 imposed 2024 Investigations under Article 4 of Law No. 4054 Case name, companies under investigation and industry Issues Developments Cleaning products• Viking Kağıt ve Selüloz Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ Restrictive agreements—RMP •Settlement agreement reached—13/11/2024; fines totalling TRY 9,073,292 imposed Private education• 18...

The legal development of margin squeeze

The legal development of margin squeeze Margin squeeze is an example of ‘exclusionary' conduct that targets competitors with the aim of eliminating or weakening their position as viable rivals—either by forcing them out of the market or by making entry unattractive in the first instance. In particular, where a vertically-integrated undertaking holds a dominant position in an upstream market for the supply of an essential input and supplies this input to wholesale customers who are also retail competitors, it may have the ability and incentive to exclude these competitors from the downstream (retail) market. In effect, the dominant undertaking ‘squeezes’ the downstream competitors’ margins (ie the gap between the cost of its required inputs and the price it can achieve on the downstream market) by charging a high wholesale price, a low retail price, or a combination of both. The resulting ‘spread’ between the price at which the dominant undertaking sells the good/service on the retail market and the price at which it sells the upstream input to...

Discover our 2 Practice Notes on Excessive pricing

Competition law compliance—dominant position guide for staff

Competition law compliance—dominant position guide for staff 1 What is dominance? 1.1 As a rough rule of thumb, once a business consistently has a market share in excess of 40%, it is likely to be in a dominant position. That market share typically needs to have been maintained for at least two years. However, market shares are not the only factor in determining whether a business is dominant—it will be dominant if it can act, to an appreciable extent, independently of its competitors, customers and consumers in the relevant market. 1.2 When an organisation occupies a position of dominance, it has a ‘special responsibility’ not to allow its conduct to impair genuine competition. Failure to adhere to the ‘special responsibility’ puts a business at risk of abusing a dominant position. Determining what might be abusive is not always clear-cut. 2 Why market dominance is a concern 2.1 Dominant businesses have a special responsibility to ensure their conduct does not distort competition. 2.2 Dominant companies should constantly assess their conduct...

Competition law compliance—pricing FAQs

Competition law compliance—pricing FAQs This pricing FAQs document is intended as a quick reference guide for staff. Competition law in relation to pricing is concerned with the distortion of competition and safeguarding the interests of consumers. It is not strictly about controlling excessive profits. There may be objectively justifiable reasons why your product or service should be priced differently from comparator products/services, but you must be careful. If you do not find the answer to your question or concern in this document, you must contact [insert, eg the legal team] immediately. 1 Can I discount a package of products even after I have established prices for the individual products? Bundling is generally acceptable if the price meets or exceeds the cost of the items. The incremental price for the second product should cover both its cost and a proportional contribution to fixed cost. 2 Do we have to offer the same prices/discounts to all customers and prospects? Not necessarily: if differences in prices offered to customers are objectively justifiable...

Dive into our 2 Precedents related to Excessive pricing

EU Competition law—daily round-up (05/06/2025)

A round-up of EU competition law developments, including (amongst other things) (1) an AG opinion concerning a national reference from the Czech Republic seeking clarification as to whether a collective management organisation’s failure to account for hotel room occupancy when setting copyright royalties for licensed works constitutes a breach of Article 102 TFEU, (2) an AG opinion concerning a national reference from Sweden seeking clarification as to whether compensation provided to a company owned by a Swedish municipality constitutes new or existing aid, and (3) the Commission’s decision to launch a consultation on a revision of the SGEI State aid rules to address the issue of housing affordability.

Life Sciences weekly highlights—15 May 2025

This week's edition of Life Sciences weekly highlights includes two analyses by Gill Jennings & Every LLP: one regarding the EU landscape of patent-eligible subject matter in AI healthcare and another on a judgment (Generics, Teva & Glenmark v AstraZeneca) that again demonstrates how UK patent law is diverging from the European Patent Office’s approach. Also included, are Law360 news reports on the call for the UK-US trade deal to address better pharma and IP and analysis of the Court of Appeal’s unanimous decision upholding the CMA’s initial fine against Advanz for breaking competition law through excessive pricing of liothyronine tablets to the NHS overruling the CAT’s reduction of the fines. Further stories included are news that international draft guidance establishing regulatory principles for AI’s use in pharmacovigilance was published, the ABPI warned in its response to the DHSC’s March 2025 consultation on increasing the statutory scheme payment rates for branded medicines that these rates along with VPAG payments could undermine UK pharmaceutical investment, the EMA and the HMA published...

Read the latest 3 News articles on Excessive pricing