• Recently Written

  • Coming up: ECJ to give judgment in C-280/08 P Deutsche Telekom on 14 October
  • “This is a strange abuse”*: advocate general Mazák on margin squeeze, once again
  • “in regard of causes now in hand”*: a midsummer roundup of ECJ cases
  • “a joint burden laid upon us all”*: advocate general on universal service financing
  • “Confusion now hath made his masterpiece!”* Advocate general reprimands Council and Commission

• Categories

  • communication technologies
  • competition/mergers/state aid
  • copyright
  • digital content
  • events / publications
  • fundamental rights
  • national regulatory authorities
  • public services
  • spectrum policy

• 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

  • antitrustlawblog
  • antitrustprof
  • e-comm (in German)
  • Electronic Communications Regulation Update
  • Eoin O'Dell
  • informationoverlord
  • lexferenda
  • Media Law Prof Blog
  • MediaPal @ LSE
  • Net Neutrality in Europe
  • Online Journal on International Constitutional Law
  • professor geradin
  • telemedicus (in German)
  • Virtual Law @ LSE

• RSS-Feed

  

  • Admin

    • Login
    • Wordpress

ECJ and GC: Decided Cases

Here is a list of cases already decided by the Court of Justice and the General Court of the European Union (with links to our posts about the case, if there are any; if there is no contentandcarrier-post, there might be a link to my German language blog e-comm).

The list tries to cover all the major cases, but of course there is no guarantee the accuracy and completeness, especially as in some cases you could well argue about whether or not to include it in the list. Chronologically, the list starts at about the time we started this blog. For an overview of the case law in telecommunications before that time, we point you to this publication of DG Information Society (2010) with an update from February 2010. For pending cases, see here.

Closed Cases at the Court of Justice of the European Union:

• C-284/04 T-Mobile Austria GmbH and others v. Austria and C-369/04, Hutchison 3G UK Ltd; spectrum assignment as economic activity under article 4 para 2 of the 6th VAT-directive? Judgments of 26. June 2007 see post at e-comm (in German);
• C-256/05 Telekom Austria AG; order of 06 October 2005: the ECJ decided that it “clearly has no jurisdiction to answer the question referred by the Telekom-Control-Kommission”; see here at e-comm (in German);
• C-380/05, Centro Europa 7; frequency assignment for tv-broadcaster; opinion of advocate general, see this post ; judgment of 31. January 2008 see this post;
• C-426/05 - Tele2UTA - art 4 and art 16 of the framework directive; judgment of 21 February 2008 see this post;
• C-55/06 Arcor (cost orientation, access to unbundled lines, according to the unbundling regulation); judgment of 24 April 2008 see this post;
• C-64/06 - Ceský Telecom - art 8 access directive and Art 6, 7 and 16 framework directive; judgment of 14 June 2007 see this post;
• C-125/06P Commission v. Infront WM, “listed events”; see this post; judgment of 13 March 2008 (dismissing the Commission’s appeal);
• C-190/06 - Belgacom - art 5 and 10 authorisation directive, art 7 RTTE-directive, art 2, 4 and 13 access directive and art 8 framework directive; struck off the register 11  July 2007;
• C-195/06, KommAustria v. Österreichischer Rundfunk, definition of teleshopping, art 1 (f) of the “Television without Frontiers”-directive ; judgment of 18 October 2007 see this post;
• C-250/06 UPC Belgium, must carry-rules and freedom to provide services; judgment of 13 December 2007 see this post;
• C-262/06 - Deutsche Telekom - article 27 framework directive and article 16 universal service directive; judgment of 22 November 2007 see this post;
• C-275/06 Promusicae; no obligation for copyright hodlers to paas on personal data (IP-addresses of the users of P2P-services) to copyright holders judgment of 29 January 2008 see this post;
• C-296/06 Telecom Italia (licence fees); opinion of advocate general see this post; judgment of 21 February 2008 see this post;
• C-301/06 Ireland v. Council and Parliament (annulment of data retention directive); judgment of 10 February 2009 see this post;
• C-337/06 Bayerischer Rundfunk and others (procurement: broadcaster financed by licence fee is contracting authority); judgment of 13 December 2007 see this post;
• C-387/06 Commission v. Finland (powers of the Finnish regulatory authority); judgment of 10 January 2008 see this post;
• C-441/06 Commission v. France; infringement for not implementing a state aid decision concerning France Télécom; judgment of 18 October 2007;
• C-500/06 Corporación Dermoestética SA v. To me Group Advertising Media (prohibition of advertisements for medical or surgical treatments of a cosmetic nature); judgment of 17 July 2008 siehe see here at e-comm (German);
• C-52/07 Kanal 5 and TV 4 (abuse of dominant position of a copyright holder organisation; different remuneration model for public-servie broadcaster); judgment of 11 December 2008 see this post;
• C-82/07 Comisión del Mercado de las Telecomunicaciones (tasks of the national regulatory authority taken care of by several authorities); judgment of 06 March 2008 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-152/07 - C-154/07 Arcor, Communication Services Tele2, 01051 Telekom (access deficit contribution); opinion of the advocate general see this post; judgment of 17 July 2008 see this post;
• C-202/07 P France Télécom v. Commission (appeal against judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 January 2007, T-340/03); opinion of the advocate general see this post; judgement of 02 April 2009 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-220/07 Commission v. France (designation of universal service operator); judgment of 19 June 2008 see this post;
• C-222/07 UTECA (TV; obligatory funding of European movies); judgment of 05 March 2009 see this post;
• C-227/07 Commission v. Poland (powers of national regulatory authority); judgment of 13 November 2008 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-230/07 Commission v. Netherlands (caller location information for 112 emergency calls); judgment of 09 October 2008 see this post;
• C-274/07 Commission v. Lithuania (caller location information for 112 emergency calls); judgment of 11 September 2008;
• C-305/07 RAI (financing of public service broadcaster); declared manifestly inadmissible, order of 09 April 2008;
• C-333/07 Régie Networks (state aid for radio broadcasting); judgment of 22 December 2008 see this post;
• C-336/07 Kabel Deutschland (must carry obligations for cable tv-operator); judgment of 22 December 2008 see this post;
• C-424/07 Commission v. Germany (new or emerging markets, “regulatory holidays”); see this post; judgment of 3 December 2009 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-431/07 P Bouygues v. Commission (state aid; UMTS licences; appeal against judgment of the Court of First Instance of 04 July 2007, T-475/04); opinion of the advocate general see this post; judgment of 02 April 2009 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-458/07 Commission v. Portugal (universal service, directory); judgment of 12 March 2009 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-492/07 Kommission v. Poland (definition of “subscriber”); judgment of 22 January 2009 see this post;
• C-493/07 Commission v. Slowakia (caller location information for 112 emergency calls), judgment of 25 July 2008 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-539/07 Commission v. Italy (caller location information for 112 emergency calls); judgment of 15 January 2009;
• C-557/07 LSG (IP-addresses, file-sharing, e-privacy); order of 19 February 2009, see this post;
• C-8/08 T-Mobile Netherlands and others (Art 81 EC, concerted practice); judgment of 04 june 2009 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-58/08 Vodafone (is article 4 of the roaming regulation invalid?); hearing on 28 April 2009; opinion of advocate general on 1 October 2009, see here at e-comm (German); judgment on 8 June 2010, see this post;
• C-132/08 LIDL Magyarország Kereskedelmi Bt./Nemzeti Hírközlési Hatóság Tanácsa (radio equipment RTTE directive 1999/5/EC and general product safety directive 2001/95/EC); judgment of 30 April 2009 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-171/08 Commission v. Portugal (golden shares in Portugal Telecom S.A.); opinion of the advocate general delivered on 2 December 2009; judgment on 8 July 2010 see here at e-comm (in German);
• C-192/08 TeliaSonera (interconnection requirement, article 4 access directive); judgment of 12 November 2009 see here at e-comm (German);
• C-317 /08, C-318/08, C-319/08 and C-320/08, Alassini, Califano, Iacono, Multiservice; mandatory attempt at conciliation (see here); hearing on 10. September 2009; opinion of the advocate general 10 November 2009, see here at e-comm (German); judgment on 18 March 2010, see this post;
• C-309/08 Commission v. Poland (independence of NRA); struck off the register 17 September 2009;
• C-522/08 Telekomunikacja Polska v.UKE (prohibition of combined sales of telecommunication services); judgment on 11 March 2010, see this post;
• C-545/08 Commission v. Poland (regulating end user tariffs for broadband serviceswithout orior market analysis); judgment on 6 May 2010, see this post;
• C-99/09 Polska Telefonia v. UKE (cost of mobile number portability); opinion of advocate general on 15 April 2010 - see this post; judgment on 1 July 2010 see this post on e-comm (in German);
• C-143/09 Pannon GSM Távközlési Rt v. Nemzeti Hírközlési Hatóság Tanácsának Elnöke (universal service directive; application for 2003, before Hungary’s accession to the EU?); order of 17 September 2009: Art 13 (2) of the universal service directive not applicable in dispute about (universal service-)contribution for 2003 (before Hungary’s EU-membership);
• C-185/09 Commission v. Sweden (failure to transpose the data retention directive); judgement of 4 February 2010;
• C-189/09 Commission v. Austria (failure to transpose the data retention directive), judgment of 29 July 2010, see this post;
• C-192/09 Commission v. Netherlands (failure to transpose the data retention directive); struck of the register 11 November 2009;
• C-202/09 Commission v. Ireland and C-211/09 Commission v. Greece (failure to transpose the data retention directive); judgment of 26 November 2009 see here at e-comm (German);

Closed cases at the General Court of the European Union (formerly: Court of First Instance):

• T-271/03 Deutsche Telekom v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision of 21 May 2003, Case No C(2003)1536 final); judgment of 10 April 2008 see this post; Deutsche Telekom has appealed, the case is pending at the Court of Justice: C-280/08 P Deutsche Telekom AG;
• T-340/03 France Télécom v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision COMP/38.233, abuse of dominant positon on broadband market in France); judgment of 30 January 2007 see here at e-comm (German); the appeal brought by France Télécom was dismissed by the Court of Justice on 02 April 2009 (C-202/07 P France Télécom v. Commission, see here at e-comm (German);
• T-433/03, T-434/03, T-367/04 and T-244/05 Gibtelecom (roaming agreement with Spain); see this post;
• T-442/03 SIC v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision C(2003)3526 (final) of 15 October 2003, ad-hoc aid for Portuguese broadcaster RTP); judgment of 26 June 2008 see this post;
• T-144/04 TF1 v. Commission (state aid for France 2 and France 3); inadmissible order of 19 May 2008, see here at e-comm (German);
• T-309/04 TV2 v. Commission, T-317/04 Denmark v. Commission, T-329/04 Viasat Broadcasting UK v. Commission and T-336/04 SBS and SBS Danish Television/Kommission (state aid for TV2 Denmark; Commission decision of 19 May 2004, C 2/2003, published in the Official Journal of 23 March 2006); judgment of 22 October 2008 see this post;
• T-425/04 France v. Commission, T-444/04 France Télécom v. Commission, T-450/04 Bouygues v. Commission, T-456/04 AFORS Télécom v. Commission (state aid; annulment of Commission Decision C(2004)3060); judgment on 21 May 2010, see this post, and here at e-comm [in German]; appeal pending: C-399/10 P Bouygues;
• T-427/04 France v. Commission and T-17/05 France Télécom v. Commission (state aid, annulment of Commission decision C(2004) 3061); judgment of 30 November 2009 see here at e-comm (German); appeal pending before the ECJ (case C-81/10 P France Télécom);
• T-12/05 TV Danmark A/S and Kanal 5 Denmark Ltd. v. Commission and T-16/05 Viasat Broadcasting UK Ltd v. Commission (state aid; recapitalisation of TV2, annulment of Commission Decision N 313/2004); order of 24 September 2009: “no need to give a decision in the present action;”
• T-354/05 TF1 v. Commission (state aid; French system of financing public service broadcaster; Commission decision of 20 April 2005, E 10/2005); judgment of  11 March 2009 see this post;
• T-8/06 FAB v. Commission, T-21/06 Germany v. Commission, T-24/06 MABB v. Commission (state aid, annulment of Commission decision C(2005)3903, aid for DVB-T-introduction in Berlin-Brandenburg); judgments of 6 October 2009; Germany brought an appeal against the judgment T-21/06 - the case is pending at the ECJ: C-544/09 P Germany v. Commission;
• T-109/06 - Vodafone v. Commission (concerning “no comments-letter” under article 7 of the framework directive); declared inadmissible, order of 12 December 2007; see this post;
• T-295/06 Base v. Commission (similar to T-109/06 - Vodafone v. Commission; concerning “comments letter” nder article 7 of the framework directive); inadmissible; see here at e-comm (German);
• T-177/07 Mediaset v. Commission (state aid; digital decoders), hearing on 3 June 2009; judgment on 15 June 2010; see this post; appeal pending: C-403/10 P Mediaset;
• T-2/08 Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen v. Commission (action to annul Commission Decision from 23 Oktober 2007 concerning state aid for DVB-T), order of 5 October 2009: inadmissible;
• T-441/08 ICO Services Ltd v. Parliament and Council (annulment of decision 626/2008/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2008 on the selection and authorisation of systems providing mobile satellite services [MSS]); order of 21 May 2010: inadmissible;
• T-533/08 Telekomunikacja Polska v. Commission (obligation to osubmit to an inspection in accordance with Article 20(4) of Council Regulation No 1/2003, in connection with a procedure concerning the alleged application of practices incompatible with Article 82 EC in the electronic communications sector); removed from the register on 19 March 2010;
• T-568/08 M6 v. Commission and T-573/08 TF1 v. Commission (annulment of Commission decision of 16 June  2008, N 279/2008, recapitalization for France Télévisions); hearing on 10 March 2010; judgment on 1 July 2010, see this post at e-comm (in German);
• T-196/09 TerreStar Europe v. Commission (annulment of Decision 2009/449/EC on the selection of operators of pan-European systems providing mobile satellite services (MSS), OJ 2009 L 149, p. 65; the application for interim measures was dismissed on 10 July 2009); by order of 1 March 2010 removed from the register;