We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.

Durham Research Online
You are in:

Undistorted, un(fair) competition, consumer welfare and the interpretation of Article 102 TFEU.

Chirita, Anca D. (2010) 'Undistorted, un(fair) competition, consumer welfare and the interpretation of Article 102 TFEU.', World competition law and economics review., 33 (3). pp. 417-436.


This article explains the Lisbon Treaty’s provisions relating to competition policy and offers a dynamic interpretation of Article 102 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which could justify the consideration of an effects-based approach to those anti-competitive practices that are most harmful to the final consumers under the economic theory of consumer welfare. The implications of ‘consumerprotection requirements’ must shed special light on Article 12 TFEU. Therefore, this article examines the possibility of shifting the courts’ teleological interpretation of Article 102, which is based on Protocol 27’s ‘undistorted competition’, towards a legal balancing test of the Treaty’s objectives. It also highlights the interpretation of undistorted competition within the internal market and the interplay between EU ‘free’ and fair and unfair competition rules. The balance of EU competition law should, therefore, be performed between Article 119 TFEU’s free competition or economic freedom-based competition and Article 12 as ensuring a ‘high level of protection’, as embedded in the Treaty, for the final consumers. This article explains how consumer-protection requirements must be defined narrowly so that Article 12 may be applied to Article 102. Article 12 can, therefore, mandate a high level of consumer protection for the final consumers in implementing such a specific policy as the abuse of dominance.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(VoR) Version of Record
Download PDF
Publisher Web site:
Publisher statement:Reprinted from World competition law and economics review., 33(3), 2010, 417-436 with permission of Kluwer Law International.
Date accepted:No date available
Date deposited:19 October 2016
Date of first online publication:2010
Date first made open access:No date available

Save or Share this output

Look up in GoogleScholar