首页> 外文期刊>International review of intellectual property and competition law >'Turning Government Data Into Gold': The Interface Between EU Competition Law and the Public Sector Information Directive-With Some Comments on the Compass Case
【24h】

'Turning Government Data Into Gold': The Interface Between EU Competition Law and the Public Sector Information Directive-With Some Comments on the Compass Case

机译:“将政府数据转化为黄金”:欧盟竞争法与公共部门信息指令之间的接口-兼对指南针案的评论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This short article was triggered by the recently delivered preliminary ruling by the CJEU in the Compass case. The case is important since it raises difficult questions regarding when a public sector body should benefit from the application of EU competition law in general and is especially interesting for those public sector bodies that create the essential information needed for the growing public sector information industry. The main issue discussed in the article is when public sector bodies should be considered "undertakings" under EU competition law. The substantive issue of the case is whether the specific conduct under scrutiny, i.e. the distribution of public sector information for remuneration, is an economic activity or not. In light of the Compass case, the author argues that the underlying doctrine, derived from quite a number of CJEU cases, needs to be narrowed down and tightened so that public sector bodies are only exempted and considered as not conducting economic activities when the scrutinized activity truly constitutes an essential function of the state. The CJEU should thereby refine the current case law regarding the dichotomy between undertakings, which benefit from the application of competition law, and public or private bodies that perform acts of sovereign public power and connected conduct, which do not. EU competition law should prevail if a public sector body or a private body conducts an activity that creates or is conducted on a market, irrespective of whether that body simultaneously conducts a public task, as long as it is not an exercise of public power.
机译:这篇简短的文章是由欧洲法院最近在指南针案中作出的初步裁定引发的。此案之所以重要,是因为它提出了一个难题,即有关公共部门机构何时应从总体上从欧盟竞争法中受益的问题,并且对于那些创建不断增长的公共部门信息产业所需的重要信息的公共部门机构而言,尤其令人感兴趣。本文讨论的主要问题是,根据欧盟竞争法,应将公共部门机构视为“企业”。该案的实质性问题是,受审查的具体行为,即分配公共部门的报酬信息是否属于经济活动。鉴于指南针案,作者认为,来自相当数量的欧洲法院案例的基本理论需要缩小和收紧,以便只有在经过仔细审查的活动中公共部门机构才被豁免并被视为不从事经济活动。真正构成国家的基本职能。因此,欧洲法院应该完善有关判例之间的二分法的现行判例法,而分治法得益于竞争法的实施,而公法或私法机构则可以执行主权公共权力和关联行为,而后者则没有。如果公共部门机构或私人机构进行的活动是建立或在市场上进行的,则该竞争法应优先于欧盟竞争法,而不论该机构是否同时执行公共任务,只要它不是行使公共权力即可。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号