الإطار القانوني لرفض ترخيص استخدام المرافق الحيوية في فلسطين: دراسة مقارنة

Alqaisi, M. (2013). Towards a proper legal framework for regulating abuse of dominant position in the occupied Palestinian territory (Doctoral dissertation, Vrije Universiteit).

Castaldo, A., & Antonio, N. (2005, September 15–17). Essential facility access in Europe: Building a test for antitrust policy. The European Association of Law and Economics Conference, Ljubljana, Slovenia.

Cotter, T. (2008). The essential facilities doctrine. SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1125368

Court of First Instance (First Chamber). (1992). Cases T-68/89, T-77/89 and T-78/89, Società Italiana Vetro SpA, Fabbrica Pisana SpA and PPG Vernante Pennitalia SpA v Commission of the European Communities.

Dacar, R. (2023). The essential facilities doctrine, intellectual property rights, and access to big data. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 54, 1487–1507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-023-01396-7

European Commission. (1993). IV/34.689 Sea Containers v. Stena Sealink.

European Commission. (1997). Commission notice on the definition of relevant market for the purposes of Community competition law (97/C 372/03). Official Journal of the European Communities.

European Commission. (1998). Notice on the application of the competition rules to access agreements in the telecommunications sector: Framework, relevant markets and principles.

European Commission. (2004). COMP/C-3/37.792 Microsoft v. Sun Microsystems.

European Commission. (2005). DG Competition discussion paper on the application of Article 82 of the Treaty to exclusionary abuses.

European Commission. (2007). Roundtable on refusal to deal: Note by the European Commission.

European Commission. (2009). Guidance on the Commission's enforcement priorities in applying Article 82 of the EC Treaty to abusive exclusionary conduct by dominant undertakings (2009/C 45/02).

European Court of Justice. (1974). Case 6/73 Istituto Chemioterapico Italiano S.p.A. & Commercial Solvents Corp. v Commission of the European Communities.

European Court of Justice. (1978a). Case 27/76 United Brands Company & United Brands Continental BV v Commission of the European Communities.

European Court of Justice. (1978b). Case 77/77 Benzine en Petroleum Handelsmaatschappij BV & others v Commission of the European Communities.

European Court of Justice. (1979). Case 85/76 Hoffmann-La Roche & Co. AG v Commission of the European Communities.

European Court of Justice (Sixth Chamber). (1998). Case C-7/97 Oscar Bronner GmbH & Co. KG v Mediaprint Zeitungs- und Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH & Co. KG.

European Court of Justice. (2003). Case T-219/99 British Airways plc v Commission of the European Communities.

Fredriksson, S. (2001). When the refusal to deal becomes an abuse of a dominant position: A study of how Article 82 EC Treaty limits the freedom of action for undertakings in a dominant position (Master’s thesis, Lund University).

Ghīlās, T. (2017). Naẓariyyat al-tashīlāt al-asāsiyyah: Wasīlah li-munāfasah fiʿliyyah. Al-Majallah al-Akādīmiyyah lil-Baḥth al-Qānūnī, 2, 11–19.

Ḥīdah, M. (1998). Al-sūq: Ādābuhu wa-aḥkāmuhu. Al-Muntadā al-Islāmī, 124, 46–53.

Lidgard, H. (2009). Refusal to supply or to license. SSRN. https://bit.ly/3EdK7A3

Lorenz, M. (2013). Article 102 TFEU – Abuse of a dominant position. In An introduction to EU competition law (pp. 188–241). Cambridge University Press.

Oliver, P. (2005). The concept of “abuse” of a dominant position under Article 82 EC: Recent developments in relation to pricing. European Competition Journal, 1(2), 315–339. https://doi.org/10.5235/ecj.v1n2.315

Opinion of Advocate General Jacobs. (2004). Synetairismos Farmakopoion Aitolias & Akarnanias (Syfait) and others v GlaxoSmithKline plc and GlaxoSmithKline AEVE (Case C-53/03).

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). Roundtable on refusals to deal: Note by the European Commission.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). Refusals to deal. https://bit.ly/2YAKSPX

Peric, G. (2022). EU competition law and abuse of dominance: A deep dive into Article 102 of the TFEU. Örebro University. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1691421/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Qarār bi-Qānūn Raqm (11) li-Sanat 2025 bishāʾn al-Munāfasah. (2025). Al-Waqāʾiʿ al-Filasṭīnīyah, 226, 23.

Razāyqīyah, Z. (2016). Taʾthīr qānūn al-munāfasah ʿalá ḥuqūq al-milkiyyah al-fikriyyah (Master’s thesis, Jāmiʿat 8 Māy 45 – Qālamah, Algeria).

Taʿlīmāt Raqm (1) li-Sanat 2011m bishāʾn ḥimāyat al-munāfasah fī qiṭāʿ al-ittiṣālāt. (2011). Al-Waqāʾiʿ al-Filasṭīnīyah, 93, 111.

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. (2009).

Ünver, M. (n.d.). Essential facilities doctrine under EC competition law and particular implications of the doctrine for telecommunications sectors in EU and Turkey (Master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey).

Vijver, T. (2013). Article 102 TFEU: How to claim the application of objective justifications in the case of prima facie dominance abuses? Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 2, 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeclap/lps062.