The rule of reason and the fundamentals against more presumption-based illegality legal standards: highlights on CADE's decisions on digital economy issues.

This article examines the Brazilian Competition Authority's (CADE) continued reliance on the Rule of Reason approach in assessing unilateral conduct cases, particularly in digital markets, opposing a shift toward presumption-based illegality standards. It outlines CADE's legal framework under the Brazilian Competition Law, which presumes dominance at a 20% market share threshold but requires detailed analysis of market power and competitive effects before condemning conduct. The article reviews three key digital economy cases—Google Shopping, Gympass/Total Pass, and iFood/Rappi—demonstrating CADE's thorough, effects-based evaluations that balance potential harms and efficiencies rather than imposing per se illegality. It concludes that CADE's approach aims to maximize consumer welfare by preventing abuse of market power without discouraging pro-competitive innovation, emphasizing caution against overly broad presumptions that could hinder beneficial conduct.