Thomas Perroud is a tenured professor of public law at Panthéon-Assas University, based in Paris. 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.
1838
On 4th April 2008, OFCOM published a document entitled “Award of available spectrum: 2500-2690 MHz, 2010-2025MHz” (hereafter “The Award”). This document contained important information on how and when OFCOM intended to go about licensing the spectrum concerned. The contentious decision was (...)
3481
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.
1548
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 (...)
2383
I. Facts of the case After a period of negotiation, Anglian Water provided Aquavitae with wholesale access prices for supplies to four of Anglian Water’s existing customers. Aquavitae was not satisfied with the wholesale access prices being offered by Anglian Waterand asked Ofwat to make a (...)
3285
1. The context Royal Mail is the provider of a universal postal service in the United Kingdom. It operates by virtue of a licence granted on 23 March 2001 and amended on 1 April 2003. Condition 8(4) of its licence requires Royal Mail to use all reasonable endeavours at all times to apply the (...)
3470
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 (...)
3930
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’) (...)
1128
The European choice to give competition law a constitutional character, as conferred by its inclusion in the Treaty, must be discussed. Our intuition is that, in doing so, the Union wished to give competition law a role beyond its capacity: that of remedying the imperfections of the political (...)
4426
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 (...)
