The Law of the WTO and the Communications Law of the EC : On a Path of Harmony or Discord?

This paper presents an overview of the law of the World Trade Organization (WTO) relevant to telecommunications services and correlates this body of law with the current regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services in the European Community. The latter has been adapted to meet the challenges of technological and market developments in communications, epitomized by the processes of digitization, enhanced transport networks and convergence. The novel solutions embodied in the EC electronic communications regime, notably, a new design of the Significant Market Power mechanism, a projected withdrawal of sector specific regulation and an affirmation of the principle of technological neutrality, pose interesting questions as to the conformity of this reformed EC communications law with the WTO rules on telecommunications services and the obligations of the European Communities and their Member States. Looking beyond the WTO legal compatibility test, essential questions regarding the need for evolution of the WTO telecommunications rules are raised. The present paper contributes to the ongoing debate in that context in light of the EC experience.

EC Electronic Communications and Competition Law

Telecommunications have developed at an incredible speed over the last couple of decades. The decreasing size of our phones and the increasing number of ways in which we can communicate are barely the only result of this (r)evolutionary development. The latter has indeed multiple implications. The change of paradigm for telecommunications regulation, epitomised by the processes of liberalisation and reregulation, was not sufficient to answer all regulatory questions pertinent to communications. Today, after the transition from monopoly to competition, we are faced perhaps with an even harder regulatory puzzle, since we must figure out how to regulate a sector that is as dynamic and as unpredictable as electronic communications have proven to be, and as vital and fundamental to the economy and to society at large. The present book addresses the regulatory puzzle of contemporary electronic communications and suggests the outlines of a coherent model for their regulation. The search for such a model involves essentially deliberations on the question "Can competition law do it all?", since generic competition rules are largely seen as the appropriate regulatory tool for the communications domain. The latter perception has been the gist of the 2002 reform of the European Community (EC) telecommunications regime, which envisages a withdrawal of sectoral regulation, as communications markets become effectively competitive and ultimately bestows the regulation of the sector upon competition law only. The book argues that the question of whether competition law is the appropriate tool needs to be examined not in the conventional contexts of sector specific rules versus competition rules or deregulation versus regulation but in a broader governance context. Consequently, the reader is provided with an insight into the workings and specific characteristics of the communications sector as network-bound, converging, dynamic and endowed with a special societal role and function. A thorough evaluation of the regulatory objectives in the communications environment contributes further to the comprehensive picture of the communications industry. Upon this carefully prepared basis, the book analyses the communications regulatory toolkit. It explores the interplay between sectoral communications regulation, competition rules (in particular Article 82 of the EC Treaty) and the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO) relevant to telecommunications services. The in-depth analysis of multilevel construct of EC communications law is up-to-date and takes into account important recent developments in the EC competition law in practice, in particular in the field of refusal to supply and tying, of the reform of the EC electronic communications framework and new decisions of the WTO dispute settlement body, such as notably the Mexico-Telecommunications Services Panel Report. Upon these building elements, an assessment of the regulatory potential of the EC competition rules is made. The conclusions drawn are beyond the scope of the current situation of EC electronic communications and the applicable law and explore the possible contours of an optimal regulatory framework for modern communications. The book is of particular interest to communications and antitrust law experts, as well as policy makers, government agencies, consultancies and think-tanks active in the field. Experts on other network industries (such as electricity or postal communications) can also profit from the substantial experience gathered in the communications sector as the most advanced one in terms of liberalisation and reregulation.

The genesis of EC environmental principles. Research Paper in Law 7/2003

[From the Introduction]. The EC Treaty in its present version contains a number of environmental principles. The following contribution will try to retrace the origins of these principles in the EC Treaty and how they were developed by the EC institutions and in particular by the Commission. This discussion concerns the principles of integration[1], prevention[2] and precaution[3], the principle that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source[4] and the polluter-pays principle[ 5].

The importance of International Developments in the case-law of the European Court of Justice: Kadi and the autonomy of the EC legal order. Research Papers in Law, 1/2009

From the Introduction. In the USA, the debate is still ongoing as to whether and to what extent the Supreme Court could or should refer to foreign precedent, in particular in relation to constitutional matters such as the death penalty.1 In the EU, in particular the recent Kadi case of 20082 has triggered much controversy,3 thereby highlighting the opposite angle to a similar discussion. The focus of attention in Europe is namely to what extent the European Court of Justice (hereafter “ECJ”) could lawfully and rightfully refuse to plainly ‘surrender’ or to subordinate the EC legal system to UN law and obligations when dealing with human rights issues. This question becomes all the more pertinent in view of the fact that in the past the ECJ has been rather receptive and constructive in forging interconnectivity between the EC legal order and international law developments. A bench mark in that respect was undoubtedly the Racke case of 1998,4 where the ECJ spelled out the necessity for the EC to respect international law with direct reference to a ruling of the International Court of Justice. This judgment which was rendered 10 years earlier than Kadi equally concerned EC/EU economic sanctions taken in implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions. A major question is therefore whether it is at all possible, and if so to determine how, to reconcile those apparently conflicting judgments.

Decentralisation of EC Competition Law Enforcement and General Principles of Community Law. Research Papers in Law, 4/2004

From the Introduction. By virtue of Council Regulation No. 1/2003, as of 1st May 2004 the full application of EC competition law will be entrusted to national competition authorities (hereinafter NCAs) and national courts. The bold reform of EC competition law enforcement adheres to the system of executive federalism1 which characterises the EC legal system. The repartition of competences within the Community allocates implementation of Community law mainly at Member States level. Pursuant to Article 10 EC, they are responsible for the implementation of the measures which have been adopted at Community level for the achievement of the objectives specified in the EC Treaty. Consequently, the attainment of the Community objectives depends very much upon the cooperation of national authorities, which act in accordance with their own national procedural rules.2 The various national procedural rules present themselves as conduits through which Community law is implemented and enforced. While as a rule Community law is not designed to alter national procedural rules, the Community legal order cannot afford to leave national procedural rules untouched when they are liable to hamper the effective application of Community law....For reason of space, this contribution intends only to highlight some aspects of Regulation No. 1/2003 with regard to which general principles of Community law are able to condition national procedural rules.

Competitive policy and pricing in business-to-business relationships within the EC market.

Tutkielman tarkoituksena oli tarkastella hinnoittelun ja hinnanalennusten merkitystä toimittaja-asiakassuhteissa yritysmarkkinoilla, sekä sitä kuinka kilpailuoikeus säätelee hinnoittelua. Tutkielman ensisijaisena tavoitteena oli selvittää kuinka alennuspolitiikka tulisi laatia jotta se olisi EY:n kilpailuoikeuden mukaan sallittu. Aluksi hinnoittelupolitiikkaan ja strategiaan vaikuttavia seikkoja tarkasteltiin teoreettisesti ja tämän pohjalta laadittua viitekehystä sovellettiin empiiristä tutkimusta suoritettaessa. Empiirinen tutkimus oli normatiivinen case-tutkimus, jossa tarkasteltiin kahdessa toimittaja-asiakassuhteessa noudatettuja hinnoittelu- ja alennuskäytäntöjä. Aineisto kerättiin haastattelemalla toimittajan myyntihenkilöitä, ja lisänä käytettiin yrityksen sisäistä materiaalia. Analyysin tulokset osoittivat nykyisissä käytännöissä joitakin kilpailuoikeudellisia ristiriitaisuuksia, ja näihin annettiin parannusehdotuksia.

Approaching the distributive law with young pupils. 'Aproximación a la propiedad distributiva con estudiantes jóvenes'.

Resumen basado en el de la publicación