Thomas Perroud

Université Aix-Marseille
Professor, Lecturer

Thomas Perroud is a tenured professor of public law at Panthéon-Assas University. He was formerly professor at Aix Marseille University, Assistant Professor (Maître de conférences) at the Université Paris-Est Créteil and lecturer at Sciences Po. He is a member of the research centre, Chaire MADP, at Sciences Po.

Linked authors

DG COMP (Brussels)
Université Aix-Marseille
European Commission - DG TRADE
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)

Articles

19196 Bulletin

Thomas Perroud The impact of Art. 6.1 ECHR on competition law enforcement in France and the United Kingdom

3335

The first part of this article deals with the applicability of article 6 to competition law enforcement in ECHR law and in domestic laws. The proceedings before competition authorities is clearly within the scope of article 6(1) ECHR in its criminal aspect. However the ECt HR leaves to national countries a certain amount of discretion in the implementation of the fair trial requirement: they can apply it at the first stage or they can cure any possible defect of the first instance proceedings by providing a correct appeal to a tribunal with full jurisdiction. This discretion is used differently in the two countries : whereas French Courts try to strike a balance between the requirements that have to be complied with at the first stage and those that can be cured English Courts seem to be more flexible especially on the crucial point of impartiality. Indeed the main problem in both countries (and even for the European Commission) seems to be the combination in one body of the prosecution, judge, and jury functions. Lastly we try to state the factors that could have an impact in both countries for the strengthening of procedural safeguards. We try to show that human rights issues should not be construed as a burden but rather as part of a compliance strategy. This article is a reprint from the ICC Global Antitrust Review, Issue 1, 2008 ; Queen Mary’s College, Inter-Disciplinary Centre for Competition Law & Policy.

Thomas Perroud The UK CAT holds that in determining disputes the telecommunications regulator failed to address the real content of the disputes and assesses what the role of a regulator should be (T-Mobile, British Telecommunications, Hutchison 3G, Cable & Wireless UK & ORS, Vodafone)

1474

The background of this case This case is an appeal from a determination made by OFCOM under its dispute resolution powers . It is only a judgment on the core issues and not on the entire case. Here the CAT will only deal with important questions of law. This case deals with two types of (...)

Thomas Perroud The French Administrative supreme Court partly annuls the natural gas regulated retail price as the ministerial order does not allow the incumbent to cover its average total costs (Poweo a. o.)

3367

1 The regulatory background Directive 98/30/EC followed by Directive 2003/55/EC liberalized the market by broadening progressively the category of eligible clients, authorized to choose their supplier. Pursuant to article 23-1 of Directive 2003/55/EC, “Member States shall ensure that the (...)

Thomas Perroud The French Energy Regulator settles a dispute between the gas incumbent and a competitor about the provision of the complete list of metering and estimating points (Gaz de France/Poweo)

3832

The scope of the dispute The dispute arose after the refusal by Gaz de France to provide Poweo with the complete list of PCEs (metering and estimating points). The access to the list of PCEs This decision is important in two respects. Firstly, the Energy Regulation Commission (‘CRE’) clarifies (...)

921 Review

Anthony Dawes, Ben Holles De Peyer, David Bosco, Francisco Enrique González-Díaz, Jean-Philippe Christienne, Nicolas Von Lingen, Thierry De Bovis, Thomas Perroud The EU judge and the unlimited jurisdiction over the Commission’s decisions

921

The EU judicial review of the Commission’s decisions generates an abundant case law. This Trends aims to clarify the major difficulties that arise from the concept of "unlimited jurisdiction" and that manifest themselves both at the level of the control standard to which the Commission’s (...)

Send a message