Recently Written
Categories
Archives
- September 2010
- August 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- July 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
Blogroll/Links
RSS-Feed

ECJ and GC: Pending Cases

This blog follows the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the General Court of the European Union (formerly: Court of First Instance) concerning audiovisual media services and electronic communications networks and services (including competition law cases in these industry sectors). For a quick reference, this page gives a synopsis of the cases currently pending before the ECJ and GC - just the case number and name and a keyword or short sentence to give an idea of what it is about (plus a link if we already posted something, for instance about the advocate general’s opinion).

Pending at the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ):

C-222/08 Commission v. Belgium (universal service funding), hearing on 17 March 2010; opinion of the advocate general on 22 June 2010 (see this post);
C-280/08 P Deutsche Telekom AG, appeal against the judgment of the CFI from 10 April 2008, T-271/03 (see here); hearing on 25 November 2009; opinion of the advocate general delivered on 22 April 2010 (see this post); judgment coming up on 14 October 2010;
C-389/08 Base and others v. Belgacom (universal service designated by the legislature to be an ‘unfair burden’ to incumbent operator), hearing on 17 March 2010; opinion of the advocate general on 22 June 2010 (see this post);
C-403/08 Football Association Premier League and Others (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, concerning - inter alia - the conditional access directive and the satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission directive), hearing on 5 October 2010; joined with:
C-429/08 Murphy (request for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench, concerning the “illicit device” according to the conditional access directive); hearing on 5 October 2010;
C-540/08 Mediaprint v. “Österreich”-Zeitungsverlag (interpretation of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, national provision which makes it illegal to announce, offer or give bonuses with periodicals and newspapers - maintenance of media diversity?), hearing on 19 January 2010; opinion of the advocate general on 24 March 2010;
C-52/09 Konkurrensverket v. TeliaSonera Sverige AB (margin squeeze in ADSL-wholesale/retail? Article 82 EC); hearing on 18 March 2010; opinion of the advocate general on 2 September 2010, see this post;
C-92/09 Volker und Markus Schecke GbR v. Land Hessen, joined with C-93/09 Hartmut Eifert v. Land Hessen, (publication of agricultural subsidies; question 2b asks about the validity of the data retention directive); opinion of the advocate general on 17 June 2010 (advocate general Sharpston finds the questions relating to the data retention directive inadmissible; see this post and here at e-comm [in German]);
C-125/09 Commission v. Cyprus (incorrect implementation of article 11 para 1 of the framework directive and article 4 of the authorisation directive);
C-154/09 Commission v. Portugal (selection of the universal service provider);
C-281/09 Commission v. Spain (excessive spot-advertising on TV);
C-375/09 UOKiK v. Tele2 Polska (competition policy; interpretation of article 5 of Regulation 1/2003); hearing on 21 September 2010;
C-390/09 R.T.I. - Reti Televisive Italiane s.p.a. v. AGCOM (interpretation of articles 1 (c), 10, 11, 18 and 18a of directive 89/552/EEC as amended by directive 97/36/EC [”Television without frontiers”], advertising and teleshopping);
C-410/09 Polska Telefonia Cyfrowa Spółka z o.o. v. UKE (reliance on guidelines for market analysis, although not published in Polish language?);
C-431/09 Airfield and Canal Digitaal and C-432/09 Airfield (satellite broadcasting and cable retransmission-directive)
C-492/09 Agricola Esposito (whether the Italian “Tassa di Concessione Governativa” - a licence fee charged for post paid, but not for pre-paid mobile phone subscriptions - is “in breach of the principles laid down in Directive 2002/21/EC” and directive 2002/77/EG [at least part of the questions asked by the provincial tax commission seem evidently inadmissible]);
C-517/09 RTL Belgium SA; reference for preliminary ruling by the (Belgian) CSA on the notion of “effective control both over the selection of the programmes and over their organisation” in Article 1(c) of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive);
C-543/09 Deutsche Telekom, reference for a preliminary ruling by the German Federald Administrative Court concerning Art 25 of the Universal Service Directive and Art 12 of the ePrivacy-Directive;
C-544/09 P Germany v. Commission; appeal against judgment T-21/06, concerning state aid for the introduction of digital terrestrial television in Berlin-Brandenburg (Commission Decision C(2005)3903 of 9 November 2005);
C-16/10 The Number and Conduit Enterprises (Art 8 of the Universal Service Directive; reference for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal; see also the judgment of the Competition Appeals Tribunal; the issue is similar as in the case C-543/09 Deutsche Telekom;
C-52/10 Eleftheri Tileorasi A.E. ‘Alter Channel’ and Konstantinos Giannikos v Ipourgos Tipou kai Meson Mazikis Enimerosis and Ethniko Simvoulio Radiotileorasis (TV without Frontiers-directive: in the context of ’surreptitious advertising’, ist the provision of payment or of consideration of another kind a necessary defining element of the intention to advertise?)
C-70/10 Scarlet Extended (mandatory filtering by ISP); see this post;
C-71/10 Ofcom (environmental information - directive 2003/4/EC; the reference comes from the UK Supreme Court in a case where the information requested relates to the precise location of mobile phone base stations in the UK);
C-81/10 P France Télécom (appeal against the judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2009 in the joint cases T-427/04 France v. Commission and T-17/05 France Télécom v. Commission concerning state aid; annulment of Commission decision C(2004) 3061);
C-85/10 Telefónica Móviles España (Art 11 (2) directive 97/13/EG, fee for allocation of public radio frequencies without earmark);
C-134/10 Commission v. Belgium (Art 31 universal service, directive; must carry-obligation in Brussels-Capital; follow-up to the judgment of the Court of Justice of 13 December 2007, C-250/06 UPC Belgium, see this post), Commission presse release;
C-228/10 UEFA, British Sky Broadcasting Limited v. Euroview Sport Ltd (among a long list of questions mainly concerning issues of conditional access there is also a question on the definition of “television broadcasting” within the meaning of Article 2(a) of Directive 98/84/EC and Article lea) of Directive 89/552 EEC);
C-244/10 Mesopotamia Broadcast and C-245/10 Roj TV (a reference by the German Federal Administrative Court concerning secondary control under the AVMS-Directive; see this post);
C-284/10 Telefónica de España S.A. (Does article 6 of the [old] authorisation directive 97/13/EC [in the present framework, a similar rule is contained in artilce 12 of directive 2002/20/EC] permit Member States to charge holders of general authorisations an annual fee which is calculated on the basis of a percentage of gross operating income, not exceeding two per thousand?);
C-399/10 P Bouygues (appeal against the judgment of the General Court of 21 May 2010, T-450/04 Bouygues v. Commission, state aid; annulment of Commission Decision C(2004)3060 [see this post for coverage of the General Court’s decision]);
C-403/10 P Mediaset (appeal against the judgment of the General Court of 15 June 2010 -T-177/07 Mediaset v. Commission; state aid; digital decoders [see this post covering the General Court’s judgment]);
announced: Commission asks Court of [Justice to fine Italy for failing to respect a previous Court judgment (C-539/07) by not providing caller location information for 112 calls;
Most likely coming to the court: a reference for a preliminary ruling on the validity of the data retention directive, by the Irish High Court, see here and here for the decision;

Pending at the General Court of the European Union (formerly Court of First Instance - CFI):

T-193/06 TF 1 v. Commission (state aid); hearing on 22 April 2010; judgment on 13 September 2010;
T-231/06 Netherlands v. Commission and T-237/06 NOS v. Commission (state aid; annulment of Commission Decision C(2006) final of 22 June 2006 concerning the ad hoc measures implemented by the Netherlands for the purpose of financing public broadcasters in the Netherlands in relation to the State aid case No C 2/2004 (ex NN 170/2003)); hearing on 10 March 2010;
T-54/07 Vtesse Networks Ltd v. Commission (action to annul Commission decision of 12 October 2006, property tax on telecoms infrastructure, BT and Kingston, 19995-2005 - no state aid);
T-336/07 Telefónica v. Commission and T-398/07 Spain v. Commission (actions to annul Commission Decision in Case COMP/38.784 - Wanadoo España vs. Telefónica);
T-385/07 FIFA v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision 2007/479/EC of 25. June 2007 - Belgian list of events of ‘major importance to society’);
T-55/08 UEFA v. Commission and T-68/08 FIFA v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision 2007/730/EC of 16 October 2007 - British list of ‘major importance to society’);
T-114/09 Viasat Broadcasting UK v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision of 4 August 2008, N 287/2008 - rescue aid for TV 2 Danmark);
T-226/09 British Telecommunications v. Commission and T-230/09 BT Pension Scheme Trustees v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision C(2009) 685 final of 11 February 2009; state guarantee for BT Pension Fund);
T-350/09 ICO Satellite/Kommission (annulment of decision 2009/449/EC concerning mobile satellite services, OJ 2009 L 149, S. 65;
T-458/09 Slovak Telekom v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision C(2009) 6840 concerning a request for information in proceedings under art 82 EC [COMP/39.523, possible refusal to give access to infrastructure and a possible margin squeeze with respect to the unbundled local loop]);
T-520/09 TF1 a.o. v. Commission (annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 6693 final of 1 September 2009 (publication in the Official Journal) concerning a budgetary grant, of a maximum amount of EUR 450 million for 2009 in favour of France Télévisions);
T-79/10 COLT Télécommunications France v. Commission (Annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 7426 final of 30 September 2009 [state aid N 331/2008 — France], concerning the compensation for the costs of providing a public service in the amount of EUR 59 million for the establishment and operation of a very-high-speed broadband electronic communications network in the Hauts-de-Seine department; also contested in T-258/10 France Télécom v. Commission); by order of 9 June 2010 a request for interim relief was dismissed;
T-171/10 Slovak Telekom v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision C(2010) 902 of 8 February 2010; see also T-458/09);
T-226/10 UKE v. Commission (Action for annulment of Commission Veto Decision under Article 7 Framework Directive);
T-258/10 France Télécom v. Commission (Annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 7426 final of 30 September 2009 [state aid N 331/2008 — France], concerning the compensation for the costs of providing a public service in the amount of EUR 59 million for the establishment and operation of a very-high-speed broadband electronic communications network in the Hauts-de-Seine department; also contested in T-79/10 COLT Télécommunications France v. Commission);

Recently Written

Categories

Archives

Blogroll/Links

RSS-Feed

Admin

ECJ and GC: Pending Cases