Michelin v Commission [1983] Case 322/81
Judgement for the case Michelin v Commission
Table Of Contents
Michelin held to have dominant position in market of replacement tires of heavy vehicles.
Michelin argued that relevant market was broader, and was market for replacement tire in general.
-
First, looked at Interchangeability and said that clearly there is no interchangeability, but then went on to see if there could be Interchangeability from point of view from supplier!
I.e. if you are producer of light vehicles tiers, can switch to heavy vehicles tiers.
Held
Considerable investment would be needed to modify a production plant that manufactures light tiers to produce instead to produce heavy tires.
Comment: Slightly confusing, why did they have to go to look at supply, they don't do this consistently anyways
RELATED CASES
For Further Study on Michelin v Commission
A collection of the best GDL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an O...
My notes cover all the main cases in intellectual property law. They a...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedSimilar Cases
Related Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| GDL EU Law | Competition Ii Notes (4 pages) |
| Intellectual Property Law | Trade Mark Case Law Notes (68 pages) |
Competition Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Camb...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.