2010 and 2011 EU Competition Law and Sector-specific Regulatory Jurisprudence and Case Law Developments with a Nexus to Poland

Kuik, Krzysztof and Mościbroda, Anna (2012): 2010 and 2011 EU Competition Law and Sector-specific Regulatory Jurisprudence and Case Law Developments with a Nexus to Poland. Published in: Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies , Vol. 5(7), No. 2012 (2012): pp. 157-190.

Abstract

This third overview of EU competition and sector-specific regulatory jurisprudential and case law developments with a nexus to Poland covers the years 2010 and 2011. This period of time is worth noting for several reasons. First, EU courts delivered a significant number of judgments in ‘Polish’ cases including an increased number of preliminary rulings. Second, 2010-2011 developments were dominated by judgments and decisions concerning telecoms. Finally, the Commission adopted only a handful of Polish State aid decisions following a formal investigation procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU. The main developments in telecoms relate to the Court of Justice’s preliminary reference judgment in Tele 2 Polska focusing on the interpretation of Regulation 1/2003 and the PTC v UKE ruling that dealt with number portability charges. Relevant is also the antitrust prohibition decision issued by the Commission against Telekomunikacja Polska S.A. for its refusal to grant access to its wholesale broadband services. In other fields, the Court of Justice delivered three State aid judgments (including two appeals against pre-2010 judgments of the General Court) and two judgments in infringement proceedings (regarding pre EU Accession marketing authorisations for medicines and the reutilisation of data from the public sector). The General Court ruled on appeal in the butadiene rubber cartel case (e.g. in Trade-Stomil v Commission). Finally, the Commission dealt with a merger case with a truly Polish specificity (Kraft Foods/ Cadbury), approved subject to divestiture of the E. Wedel brand.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: telecommunication; pharmaceuticals; antitrust; cartel; competition law; Commission decision; state aid; merger control; case law; regulatory cases; infringement; preliminary ruling; Electronic Communications Framework; broadband; alternative operators; powers of NCA; Regulation 1/2003; modernisation; procedural autonomy; number portability; conditional approval; general prohibition of combined sales; publication requirements; Act of Accession; internet tariffs; Universal Service Directive; Framework Directive; retail broadband tariffs; generic products; marketing authorisations
• Subjects: K - Law and Economics > K2 - Regulation and Business Law > K21 - Antitrust Law

References

Brammer, S., ‘Case C-375/09, Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów v Tele2 Polska sp. z o.o (now: Netia SA), Judgment of the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of 3 May 20011’ (2012) 49(3) C.M.L.R..

Flynn, C., ‘The regulation of number porting services in the EU: Are the principles set out by the ECJ in the recent PTC decision reconcilable with the practical consequences of the earlier Mobistar judgment? Case comment to the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of 1 July 2010 Polska Telefonia Cyfrowa v President of Office of Electronic Communications (Case C-99/09)’ (2011) 4(5) YARS.

Kamiński, D., Rogozińska, A., Sasinowska, B., ‘Telekomunikacja Polska Decision: competition law enforcement in regulated markets’ (2011) 3 Competition Policy Newsletter.

Kawka, I., ’Commission guidelines on market analysis and the assessment of significant market power do not impose obligations on individuals Case comment to the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 12 May 2011 Polska Telefonia Cyfrowa sp. z o.o.(PTC) v Prezes Urzędu Komunikacji Elektronicznej (Case C-410/09)’ (2012) 5(7) YARS.

Kowalik-Bańczyk, K., ’Glosa do wyroku TS z dnia 3 maja 2011r, C-375/09’ (2012) 2 Europejski Przegląd Sądowy. Kośka D., Kuik K., ‘2008 and 2009 EU Competition Law and Sector-specific Regulatory Case Law Developments with a Nexus to Poland’ 2010 3(3) YARS.

Kuik K., ‘2007 EU Competition Law and Sector-specific Regulatory Case Law Developments with a Nexus to Poland’ 2008 1(1) YARS.

MacGregor, A., Gecic B., ‘EU Anitrust Proceedings and National Competition Authorities: A Leap in the Wrong Direction’ (2012) 1 International Trade Law & Regulation. Munoz de Juan, M., Panero Rivas, J.M., ‘Locus standi and the Private Creditor Test after the Judgment of the General Court on Buczek Automotive v Commission’ (2012) 1 EStAL.

Petit, N., Lousberg, Ch., ‘Arrêt « Tele 2 Polska »: Une interprétation contestable de la compétence des autorités nationales de concurrence’ (2011) 19 Journal de droit européen.

Pisarkiewicz, A., ’Is making the conclusion of contracts for the provision of broadband internet access service conditional upon the conclusion of a contract for telephone services prohibited? Case comment to the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of 11 March 2010 Telekomunikacja Polska SA v President of Office of Electronic Communications (Case C-522/08)’ 2011 4(5) YARS.

Soltesz, U., ‘General Court Tightens Judicial Review when Commission Applies ‘Private Creditor Test’ (2011) 2(6) Journal of European Competition Law & Practice.

Szwedziak, I., ‘Is the parallel competence set out in Regulation 1/2003 totally clear? Case comment to the preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of 3 May 2011 Tele 2 v President of Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (Case C-375/09)’ (2012) 5(7) YARS.

Wach, M., ‘Should a fee for mobile phone number portability be determined solely by subscriber preferences? Comments to the judgments of the Court of Competition and Consumers Protection of 8 January 2007 (Ref. No. XVII AmT 29/06) and 6 March 2007 (Ref. No. XVII AmT 33/06) – Portability fee’ (2008) 1(1) YARS.