Šiame darbe analizuojamas Europos Bendrijos ir Lietuvos Respublikos konkurencijos teisės normų, reglamentuojančių piktnaudžiavimą dominuojančia padėtimi nustatant nesąžiningas kainas, taikymas. Analizuojama nesąžiningų kainų sąvoka, išskiriant pagrindines tokių kainų rūšis – nepagristai didelės kainos, „grobuoniškos” kainos, diskriminacinės kainos bei nesąžiningas nuolaidų taikymas. Darbe aptariama Europos Teisingumo teismo, Europos Komisijos bei Lietuvos Respublikos Konkurencijos Tarybos bei administracinių teismų praktika, nagrinėjant nesąžiningų kainų taikymo bylas ir pateikiamos pagrindinės taisyklės, pagal kurias nesąžiningas kainas galima atskirti nuo sąžiningų, taip pat trečiame šio darbo skyriuje įvardijamos pagrindinės šių taisyklių taikymo praktikoje problemos. Paskutiniame skyriuje apžvelgiama konkurencijos teisės normų, susijusių su nesąžiningomis kainomis, įgyvendinimas Lietuvoje po įstojimo į ES, analizuojama konkurencijos politikos įgyvendinimo efektyvumas, kokybė, pateikiami pagrindiniai sprendimai bei išaiškinimai, nustatant piktnaudžiavim�� dominuojančia padėtimi taikant nesąžiningas kainas. / This thesis was set out to analyse the application of competition law on unfair pricing related to the abuse of dominant positions in the European Community and the Republic of Lithuania. Firstly, the study gives a definition of unfair pricing and identifies four types of such pricing: excessive pricing, “predatory” pricing, discriminatory pricing and unfair discounts and rebates. Then, it overviews the practice of the European Court of Justice, the European Commission and the Competition Council and the administrative courts of the Republic of Lithuania in hearing cases on unfair pricing. The author then lists the fundamental rules that may help to distinguish between fair and unfair pricing. The third chapter indicates the main problems faced when applying these rules in practice. The last chapter gives an overview of the application of competition law on unfair pricing following Lithuania’s accession to the EU. The author also analyses the effectiveness and quality of the implementation of competition policy and presents the fundamental judgements on and interpretations of unfair pricing in relation to the abuse of dominant positions.

Agentes econômicos com posição dominante são capazes de se conduzir de maneira independente na sua atividade comercial. Da mesma forma, possuem todos os incentivos para manutenção desta posição, em detrimento de seus concorrentes, fornecedores e clientes. O presente trabalho visa, inicialmente, em estudo comparado da doutrina e jurisprudência no Brasil, União Europeia e Estados Unidos, identificar os elementos de cognição da teoria do abuso de posição dominante para cinco modalidades de conduta. A partir daí traçamos seus elementos de correlação com o propósito de sugerir uma teoria aplicada ao ordenamento jurídico pátrio, que passa pelo reconhecimento da concorrência como garantia institucional, de forma a estabelecer-se igualdade material segundo a teoria da função social dos meios de produção. A presença constante da concorrência nos mercados deve ser tratada como presunção de bem-estar social. E finalmente, valendo-se destes elementos de suporte, propomos uma teoria da responsabilidade especial para agentes econômicos em posição dominante, que implicaria o dever de autoaplicação dos limites permitidos para sua conduta comercial, cujo descumprimento ensejaria presunção relativa de efeitos deletérios ao mercado, segundo os parâmetros propostos. / Firms enjoying dominant position are able to conduct themselves independently in their commercial activities. Likewise, they hold all due incentives to maintain such position, in detriment of their competitors, suppliers and clients. The present work aims, initially, through a comparative study of the Brazilian, the European Union and the United States\' legal doctrine and jurisprudence, to identify cognitive elements of the abuse of dominance theory, for five different natures of conducts. Subsequently, we identify their elements of connection with the purpose of suggesting a theory applicable to the local legal system, which includes the recognition of competition as an institutional guarantee, so to establish a material equality according to the theory of social function of productive assets. The constant presence of competition on the markets shall be treated as a presumption of social welfare. And finally, based on such supportive elements, we propose a theory of special responsibility for dominant firms that implies in a duty of self-application of the permitted limits for their commercial conduct, and which infringement would entail a relative presumption of harmful effects to the market, pursuant to the proposed parameters.

M. Comm. / The objective of the study is to critically evaluate the process of implementation of the residence—based system of taxation in South Africa and to evaluate whether the South African Revenue Service achieved their goals mentioned above through the implementation of this complex, sophisticated system of taxation. A well known cross border preference share structure will be utilised to illustrate the effect of the changes from a source to a residence taxation system. In order for a residence-based taxation system to be effective, it is essential that it draws into the tax net income earned by South Africanowned foreign entities (principally South African-owned foreign subsidiaries). If such income is not taxed, it is easy for South African residents to avoid tax by shifting their income to foreign entities in tax havens and preferential regimes, in which event the income earned by the foreign entity will be subjected to South African taxation only when repatriated as a dividend (Jooste, 2001:473-502). An efficient residence-based system spurns such a delay or deferral of taxation because taxpayers often delay repatriation for years, or never repatriate funds at all. This was exactly what the South African Revenue Service wanted to achieve through the introduction of the full-blown residence-based taxation system. The South African taxation system was based on a pure source system. Gradual changes in the economic environment necessitated certain amendments to the South African Income Tax Act to ensure that South Africa protects its tax base. Even though the residence based system of taxation was implemented over a number of years since 1997, numerous problems are still being encountered with the practical application of this complex system of taxation. South Africa's participation as a global player is examined from a tax perspective and practical application issues are examined. The taxation of foreign dividends introduced with effect 22 February 2002 serves as an example of the major impact that these changes had on cross-border structuring. Although this only serves as an example of the extent of the impact, various other cross-border structuring have been drastically impacted by these changes.