Search results

1

The Autonomy of Sector-Specific Regulation – Is It Still Worth Protecting? Further Thoughts on the Parallel Application of Competition Law and Regulatory Instruments

100%

Stawicki A.

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

|

2011

|

vol. 4(4)

115-133

EN

This article sets out to contribute to the on-going discussion regarding the relationship between competition law and sector-specific regulation, as well as the parallel application of competition law and regulatory instruments. Thus, this article attempts to provide a systematic outline of arguments which are conclusive for the proposition that sector-specific regulation must remain fully autonomous, while taking a critical stance with respect to the views of both the Supreme Court and academic lawyers who advocate the supremacy of competition law.

FR

Le sujet du présent article est la relation entre le droit de la concurrence et le droit des secteurs regulés, ainsi que l’application parallele des institutions du droit de la concurrence et des instruments regulatoires. Le but de l’article est de presenter les arguments selon lesquelles les regulations des secteurs doivent rester autonomes. Il est important de polemiquer avec l’avis exprimé par la Cour Superierure polonaise et par certains juristes qui croivent le droit de la concurrence superieur aux autres regulations.

2

Rynek hurtowy energii elektrycznej jako instrument regulacji sektora elektroenergetycznego w Unii Europejskiej i na Ukrainie

61%

Kosiński E.

Prawo

|

2019

|

issue 329

323 - 332

PL

W publikacji dokonuje się analizy obowiązujących regulacji prawnych Unii Europejskiej oraz Ukrainy w zakresie organizacji i funkcjonowania rynku hurtowego energii elektrycznej. Obowiązująca unijna regulacja prawna pozwala na stwierdzenie, że realizowane są trzy główne cele regulacji: cele ekonomiczne (w tym w zakresie wspierania konkurencji), cele z zakresu zapewnienia bezpieczeństwa energetycznego oraz cele społeczne. W konsekwencji należy uznać rynek hurtowy energii elektrycznej za instrument regulacyjny. Ukraina przyjęła na siebie obowiązek wdrożenia przepisów unijnych w zakresie regulacji sektora energetycznego (acquis communautaire Wspólnoty Energetycznej). Ustawa Ukrainy z dnia 13 kwietnia 2017 roku o rynku energii elektrycznej w zakresie organizacji i funkcjonowania rynku hurtowego energii elektrycznej wdraża do ukraińskiego porządku prawnego podstawowe zasady trzeciego pakietu energetycznego. Wymagane jest jednak dalej idące dostosowanie prawa ukraińskiego do rozporządzenia 1227/2011 (tak zwany REMIT) oraz do przyjmowanych aktów czwartego pakietu energetycznego.

EN

In this article, there is an analysis of valid European Union and Ukraine legal regulations in the area of the wholesale energy market’s organisation and functioning provided. The valid EU regulation allows us to draw the conclusion that there are 3 major goals accomplished by the energy sector regulations: economic goals (i.a. procompetitive support), energy security, and social goals. Consequently, the wholesale energy market can be regarded as a regulatory instrument. Ukraine assumed the obligation to implement EU legislation in the field of energy sector regulation (Energy Community acquis communautaire). The Act of Ukraine of 13th April 2017 in electric energy market implements the fundamental principles of the third energy package in the area of organisation and functioning of the wholesale electric energy market. It is required, however, to provide for a further implementation of EU regulation 1227/2011 (REMIT) and of the fourth energy package.

3

Compensation of Damages in Standalone Cases: Lessons to Be Learned from a Case Against a State-owned Telecommunication Company. Case Comment to the Judgment of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal of 3 March 2017 (Case No. e2A-27-464/2017)

61%

Zaščiurinskaitė R.

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

|

2017

|

vol. 10(15)

269-278

EN

Private enforcement in Lithuania is still at the early development stage, as only a few infringement decisions of the national competition authority – the Competition Council of the Republic of Lithuania – have been followed on by private antitrust claims. Nevertheless, it might be observed that victims of competition law infringements tend to initiate standalone claims for compensation of damages in Lithuania. However, not all of those cases are successful. On 3 March 2017, the Court of Appeal of Lithuania rejected a damages claim for EUR 2.9 million brought by a company that claimed to have been refused infrastructure access (an essential facility) by the dominant state-owned telecommunication company; infrastructure access was necessary for the provision of its own services. The case is interesting and worth mentioning due to the complexity and interrelation of competition law and the regulation of electronic communications (such as the interrelation of dominance in competition law and significant market power under the regulatory framework). The case is also noteworthy becaouse of the lack of involvement by the Competition Council and the Communication Regulatory Authority as well as their position in the dispute. Of relevance is also a change made to the laws related to the dispute and further consequences of the dispute.

4

What Role for EU Competition Law in Regulated Industries? Reflections on the judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2015 Orange Polska v European Commission (Case T-486/11)

61%

Marco Colino S.

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

|

2016

|

vol. 9(14)

265-278

Refine search results

3 Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

1 Prawo

1 Kosiński E.

1 Marco Colino S.

1 Stawicki A.

1 Zaščiurinskaitė R.

1 2019

1 2017

1 2016

1 2011

The Autonomy of Sector-Specific Regulation – Is It Still Worth Protecting? Further Thoughts on the Parallel Application of Competition Law and Regulatory Instruments

Rynek hurtowy energii elektrycznej jako instrument regulacji sektora elektroenergetycznego w Unii Europejskiej i na Ukrainie

Compensation of Damages in Standalone Cases: Lessons to Be Learned from a Case Against a State-owned Telecommunication Company. Case Comment to the Judgment of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal of 3 March 2017 (Case No. e2A-27-464/2017)

What Role for EU Competition Law in Regulated Industries? Reflections on the judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2015 Orange Polska v European Commission (Case T-486/11)