CASE COMMENTS: UNILATERAL PRACTICES – BOYCOTT – PORT

EFTA : The EFTA Court rules that Article 54 of the EEA Agreement (the counterpart of article 102 TFUE) may apply to a boycott initiated by a trade union and implemented by a port administration with a view to bring a forwarding agent to use unloading and loading services offered by workers employed by the port administration (Holship Norge c/ Norsk Transportarbeidforbund)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Since Brexit, there has been renewed interest in the EFTA Agreement. However, it is independently of Brexit that the judgment of the EFTA Court in the holship case should be set aside. The Norwegian Supreme Court had referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling a case in which the national courts had to decide on the legality of a boycott action, both under Article 53 EFTA (identical to Article 101 FTEU) and Article 54 EFTA (equivalent to Article 102 TFEU). We will analyse here the part of the judgment that is relevant to the subject of this column, leaving aside developments concerning cartel law (see also the Cartels column in this issue) and freedom

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • Catholic University of Louvain

Quotation

Anne-Lise Sibony, EFTA : The EFTA Court rules that Article 54 of the EEA Agreement (the counterpart of article 102 TFUE) may apply to a boycott initiated by a trade union and implemented by a port administration with a view to bring a forwarding agent to use unloading and loading services offered by workers employed by the port administration (Holship Norge c/ Norsk Transportarbeidforbund) , 19 June 2016, Concurrences Nº 3-2016, Art. N° 80809, pp. 68-70

Visites 492

All reviews