ZWeR 2015, 265
Competition between public and private undertakings
“When the State harms competition”
An undistorted competition regime can only be achieved on the condition of equality of opportunity among different businesses. The neutrality principle must be also applicable in favor of public sector undertakings according to OFT study dated 2010 and OECD study 2012. In comparative analysis with other member states (Italy and Spain) and Australia the relevant legislations provide the Competition Agencies and the Governments power to ensure and protect the neutrality principle. World Trade Organization is the new forum for international regulation of public restraints? It is a question to be answered. A “soft” solution (soft law), either in the framework of the International Competition Network (ICN) or in the framework of OECD or of the UNCTAD seems realistic. Perhaps more effective seems to be the cultivation of a competition culture (competition advocacy). In competition law, “second best” solutions constitute the reply to the problem.
Contents
- I. Free and Undistorted Competition
- 1. Addressees: private parties and the State
- 2. From the Principle of Neutrality to the Principle of Equal Treatment
- II. Legal Framework for State Measures Monitoring
- 1. Application of art. 4 par. 3 TEU in conjunction with art. 101 and 102 TFEU
- 2. Application of art. 106 par. 1 TFEU
- 2.1 Monitoring of Administrative Agreements
- 2.2 Application limits (art. 106 par. 2)
- 3. Application of art. 107 and 108 TFEU – National Aids
- 4. Conjunction of provisions 106 par. 1 and 101/102 TFEU
- 4.1 Potential abuse of dominant position
- 4.1.1 Limited demand
- 4.1.2 Conflict of interests
- 4.1.3 Conflict of Interests in liberalization
- 4.1.3.1 Athens Water Supply Company (EYDAP) – Conseil d’Etat No 1906/2014
- 4.1.3.2 Privatization of Piraeus Port Organization (OLP)
- 4.1.3.3 Greek Organisation for Football Prognostics SA (OPAP) – Conseil d’Etat No 3168/2014
- 4.2 Automatic abuse of dominant position or Result similar to the one of dominant position abuse?
- 4.2.1 Theory of effect v. Theory of conduct
- 4.2.2 Case law development and Critical Appraisal
- 4.2.3 Public Power Company (PPC-DEI) – Lignite case (2014) – Are we approaching a solution of the Effect Theory?
- 5. Concentrations/Privatizations
- III. Equality also in favor of Public Undertakings
- 1. “Weights” of Public Undertakings
- 2. Asymmetric Supervision against Public Undertakings
- IV. The regulation issue
- 1. Lessons from other legal orders
- 1.1 Spain
- 1.2 Australia
- 1.3 Italy
ZWeR 2015, 266
- 2. Trends for international regulation of state restraints/WTO v. ICN
- 2.1 World Trade Organization as a forum for international competition matters
- 2.2 ICN Network
- V. Final Remarks – Competition Advocacy
- *
- *)Dr. iur., Associate Professor at Athens University Law School
Der Inhalt dieses Beitrags ist nicht frei verfügbar.
Für Abonnenten ist der Zugang zu Aufsätzen und Rechtsprechung frei.
Sollten Sie über kein Abonnement verfügen, können Sie den gewünschten Beitrag trotzdem kostenpflichtig erwerben:
Erwerben Sie den gewünschten Beitrag kostenpflichtig per Rechnung.
Erwerben Sie den gewünschten Beitrag kostenpflichtig mit PayPal.
