El otro blog para cosas más serias

El otro blog para cosas más serias
El otro blog para cosas más serias

viernes, 9 de abril de 2010

ALMUNIA SOBRE LA RELACIÓN ENTRE REGULACIÓN Y DERECHO DE LA COMPETENCIA

"Regulation does not preclude competition enforcement. Regulation, even though it may be essential to open up sectors where there are persistent, structural market failures, cannot help companies evade competition law. Ex ante regulation can reduce the risk of competition problems, but cannot completely eliminate it. Dominant firms have been known to find ways to circumvent ex ante rules. This is why there is and always will be room and indeed a need for competition enforcement. In a regulated market, companies may of course argue that they are bound to comply with certain rules or a regulator's finding. But if there is a competition problem and the company has the power to amend its behaviour, there is room for competition enforcement. In its 2008 judgment in the Deutsche Telekom case, the EU's General Court ruled that even if the national regulator had considered the compatibility of Deutsche Telekom's behaviour with Article 102 (which it had not), the Commission cannot be bound by a decision taken by a national regulator. The Commission's 2007 Telefónica decision is an excellent example of antitrust enforcement in a regulated market, the market for wholesale broadband access (or bitstream access) in Spain. The Commission found an abuse which consisted in a margin squeeze amounting to a refusal to supply. During the period of the abuse Telefonica's market share was stable, and Spanish consumers suffered (Spain's retail prices for broadband access were among the highest in the EU-15 Member States)"

Muy bien. Si la regulación nacional no se ocupa de la conducta en cuestión. Pero el problema está cuando la regulación tiene por objeto impedir que un dominante abuse de su posición y establece las medidas ex ante y atribuye al regulador los poderes suficientes para controlar la conducta del dominante y, no obstante, las autoridades de competencia consideran que el regulador "ha hecho mal su trabajo" y no ha impedido que la empresa abuse de su posición dominante, que es lo que ocurrió en los dos casos que cita.

No hay comentarios:

Archivo del blog