Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Law Against Unfair Competition pp 77–99Cite as

The Law Against Unfair Competition and the EC Treaty

  • Chapter

  • 1432 Accesses

Part of the book series: MPI Studies on Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law ((MSIP,volume 1))

Abstract

Unlike Antitrust law, Unfair Competition law is not directly governed in the EC Treaty. The following is intended to show how European primary law nevertheless bears on the unfair commercial practices regulations of Member States.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Pursuant to Art. 97, this Treaty ended on July 23, 2002, the EC becoming the universal successor to the European Coal and Steel Community. Cf. the Protocol on the Financial Consequences of the Expiry of the European Coal and Steel Community Treaty and the Research Fund for Coal and Steel in the Treaty of Nice, OJ C 80/1, February 26, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fikentscher, “Das Verhältnis von Kartellrecht und Recht des unlauteren Wettbewerbs im deutschen und europäischen Recht,” in: “Festschrift für Walter Hallstein” 127, 151 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Steindorff, “Unlauterer Wettbewerb im System des EG-Rechts,” 1993 WRP 139.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fikentscher, supra Das Verhältnis von Kartellrecht und Recht des unlauteren Wettbewerbs im deutschen und europäischen Recht,” in: “Festschrift für Walter Hallstein” 127, 151 (1982) note 2, at 152; WÄgenbaur, “La législation de la Communauté Européenne en matière de concurrence déloyale,” in: “Droit européen de la concurrence déloyale en formation” 9, 14 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wägenbaur, supra La législation de la Communauté Européenne en matière de concurrence déloyale,” in: “Droit européen de la concurrence déloyale en formation” 9, 14 (1994) note 4, at 13. The Preamble continues to be found in the Consolidated Text of the Treaty Establishing the European Community, cf. Consolidated Text of the Treaty for the Establishment of the European Community, OJ C 340/173, November 10, 1997. Admittedly no rights can be derived from the Preamble; nevertheless it can be used to interpret the remaining text of the Treaty, LenZ, “EU-und EG-Vertrag” note 1 to the Preamble (3rd ed. 2003); Schwarze, “EU-Kommentar” Preamble of the EC Treaty (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Zuleeg, in: von der groeben & Schwarze, “kommentar zum vertrag über die europäische union und zur gründung der europäischen gemeinschaft,” art. 3 ec, note 8, vol. 1 (6th ed. 2003). accordingly, arts. 81 et seq. ec only protect honest competition, decision of the ecj, july 13, 1966, case no. 32/65, 1966 ecr 458, 483 — italien v. rat.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cf. Recital 2 of the Misleading Advertising Directive: “misleading advertising can lead to distortion of competition within the common market”, Council Directive 84/450/EEC of September 10, 1984 relating to the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States concerning Misleading Advertising, OJ L 250/17, September 9, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

    Google Scholar 

  8. In the Draft Treaty concerning a Constitution for Europe, OJ C 310/1 December 12, 2004, Art. I-3 Para. 2 uses the twin concepts of “free and undistorted” competition.

    Google Scholar 

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cf. Recital 2 of the Council Directive 84/450/EEC of September 10, 1984 relating to the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States concerning Misleading Advertising, OJ L 250/17, September 9, 1984 with the amendments that result from Art. 1 of Directive 97/55/EC of the European Parliament and Council of October 6, 1997 to Amend Directive 84/450 EEC concerning Misleading Advertising for the Purpose of Including Comparative Advertising OJ L 290/18, October 23, 1997; Zuleeg, supra note 6, Art. 3 EC, note 7.

    Google Scholar 

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cf. as example of many, Veelken, “Gemeinschaftsrechtliche Einwirkungen im Recht des unlauteren Wettbewerbs,” 1993 EWS 377; ibid., “Nationales Lauterkeitsrecht und Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht,” in: Blomeyer (ed.) “Europäische Union als Rechtsgemeinschaft” 141, 162 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Veelken, 1993 EWS 377, supra note 10.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hucke, “Erforderlichkeit einer Harmonisierung des Wettbewerbsrechts in Europa” 39 et seq. (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Koos, “Europäischer Lauterkeitsmaßstab und globale Integration” 21 et seq., 24 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Decision of the ECJ, January 29, 1985, Case No. 231/83, 1985 ECR 305, 10 — Fuel prices.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Decision of the ECJ, May 18, 1993, Case No. C-126/91, 1993 ECR I-2361, 22 — Yves Rocher.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fikentscher, supra Das Verhältnis von Kartellrecht und Recht des unlauteren Wettbewerbs im deutschen und europäischen Recht,” in: “Festschrift für Walter Hallstein” 127, 151 (1982) note 2, at 158 et seq.; ibid., “Wirtschaftsrecht” § 15 X.4, 668, Vol. 1 (1983). Not decided by Müller-Graff, in: “FS-Carstens” 209, 222 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fikentscher, supra Das Verhältnis von Kartellrecht und Recht des unlauteren Wettbewerbs im deutschen und europäischen Recht,” in: “Festschrift für Walter Hallstein” 127, 151 (1982) note 2, at 160.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Veelken, “Nationales Lauterkeitsrecht und Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht,” 92 ZVglRWiss 241, 263 (1993); ibid., 1993 EWS 377, supra note 10, at 378; ibid., in: “Europäische Union als Rechtsgemeinschaft” supra note 10, at 164. Similarly, DETHLOFF, “Europäisierung des Wettbewerbsrechts” 8 (2001). Veelken, loc.cit., at 165, would assume an unwritten Unfair Competition law at primary law level with the character of a general clause.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Decision of the ECJ, March 13, 1984, Case No. 16/83, 1984 ECR 1299, 33 — Prantl.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Only the protection of geographical indications of origin in Member States is regarded as being covered by Art. 30 EC, decision of the ECJ, November 10, 1992, Case No. C-3/91, 1992 ECR I-5529, 23 et seq. — Turrón de Alicante. Cf. Joliet, “Droit de la concurrence déloyale et libre circulation des merchandises,” in: “Droit européen de la concurrence déloyale en formation” 29, 38 et seq., 42 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cf. Pipkorn, “Das Verbot von Maßnahmen gleicher Wirkung wie mengenmäßige Beschränkungen,” in: “Beitrag des Gerichtshofes der Europäischen Gemeinschaften zur Verwirklichung des Gemeinsamen Marktes” 9, 13 et seq. (1981); Müller-Graff, in: Von Der Groeben & Schwarze, “Kommentar zum Vertrag über die Europäische Union und zur Gründung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft,” Art. 28 EC, note 29 with numerous references in footnote 72, Vol. 1 (6th ed. 2003).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Decision of the ECJ, July 11, 1974, Case No. 8/74, 1974 ECR 837 — Dassonville.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Decision of the ECJ, July 11, 1974, Case No. 8/74, 1974 ECR 837, 5 — Dassonville.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Decision of the ECJ, February 20, 1979, Case No. 120/78, 1979 ECR 649 — Cassis de Dijon. Given the extensive literature on the scope of the Cassis judicial practice, cf. Ahlfeld, supra note 5.

    Google Scholar 

  25. On the development of the concept, cf. Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 26 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Novak, “Ungleichbehandlung von ausländischen Produkten oder Dienstleistungen — Einheitliche Rechtfertigungstatbestände im EG-Vertrag,” 1997 DB 2589, 2590.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Dauses, “Die Rechtsprechung des EuGH zum Verbraucherschutz und zur Werbefreiheit im Binnenmarkt,” 1995 EuZW 425, calls this a “Copernican revolution”. Cf. on the country-of-origin principle the Communication from the Commission concerning the Consequences of the Judgement given by the Court of Justice on February 20, 1979 in Case No. 120/78 (“Cassis de Dijon”), OJ C 256/2, October 3, 1980: “Any product imported from another Member State must in principle be admitted to the territory of the importing Member State if it has been lawfully produced, that is, conforms to rules and processes of manufacture that are customarily and traditionally accepted in the exporting country, and is marketed in the territory of the latter.”

    Google Scholar 

  28. Decision of the ECJ, March 2, 1982, Case No. 6/81, ECR 1982, 707, 9 — Beele. In the decision of the ECJ, January 22, 1981, Case No. 58/80, 1981 ECR 181, 15 — Dansk Supermarked, the Court had avoided an express discussion of the subject matters of protection of the Cassis formula and held that “the marketing of imported goods can be prohibited if the conditions on which they are sold constitutes an infringement of the marketing usages considered proper and fair in the Member State of importation”.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Decision of the ECJ, November 26, 1985, Case No. 182/84, 1985 ECR 3781 — Miro.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Decision of the ECJ, May 18, 1993, Case No. C-126/91, 1993 ECR I-2361 — Yves Rocher.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Decision of the ECJ, November 26, 1985, Case No. 182/84, 1985 ECR 3781 — Miro.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Decision of the ECJ, May 18, 1993, Case No. C-126/91, 1993 ECR I-2361, 22 — Yves Rocher.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Klauer, “Die Europäisierung des Privatrechts — Der EuGH als Zivilrichter”, 359 (1997). Dissenting GÜlbay, “Vergleichende Werbung, Subsidiarität und Europa” 212 et seq. (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Capelli, 1981 RMC 421; Bleckmann, “Zur Problematik der Cassis de Dijon-Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs,” 1986 GRUR Int. 172, 177; Rabe, in: Schwarze (ed.) “Wirtschaftsrecht des Gemeinsamen Marktes in der aktuellen Rechtsentwicklung” 41, 43 (1983). Cf. the detailed discussion in Kotthoff, “Werbung ausländischer Unternehmen im Inland” 70 (1995); Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 30 et seq.; HÖdl, “Die Beurteilung von verkaufsbehindernden Maßnahmen im Europäischen Binnenmarkt” 88 et seq. (1997); Weyer, “Freier Warenverkehr und nationale Regelungsgewalt in der Europäischen Union” 49 et seq. (1997); Dethloff, supra note 18, at 141.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Cf. the detailed discussion in Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 81 et seq.; Becker, in: Schwarze, supra note 5, Art. 28 EC Treaty, 107 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Novak, supra Ungleichbehandlung von ausländischen Produkten oder Dienstleistungen — Einheitliche Rechtfertigungstatbestände im EG-Vertrag,” 1997 DB 2589 note 26.

    Google Scholar 

  37. E.g. decision of the ECJ, March 12, 1987, Case No. 178/84, 1987 ECR 1227, 30 et seq., 38 et seq. — Reinheitsgebot.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Cf. Novak, supra Ungleichbehandlung von ausländischen Produkten oder Dienstleistungen — Einheitliche Rechtfertigungstatbestände im EG-Vertrag,” 1997 DB 2589 note 26; Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 95 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  39. In this sense also Hucke, supra note 12, at 57: vertical distribution of powers.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Correctly Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 237, 286. However, this approach has not been taken to the end in a number of cases. Thus Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 21, 98 et seq. still places the Cassis judicial practice in the context of the limits to national regulatory scope.

    Google Scholar 

  41. These are protected by Art. 30 EC, cf. Advocate General Trabucchi, conclusions, 1316, 1328 in decision of the ECJ, July 14, 1976, Cases No. 3, 4, 6/76, 1976 ECR 1279 — Kramer.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Although this view is still upheld by Bleckmann, supra Zur Problematik der Cassis de Dijon-Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs,” 1986 GRUR Int. 172 note 35.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Cf. in this sense in particular the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee. The Follow-up to the Green Paper on Commercial Communication in the Internal Market, COM (98) 121 final, 5, 11. Similarly, Gormley, “Prohibiting Restrictions on Trade within the EEC” 52 (1985): “Thus the Court has sought to ensure that interests or values which are clearly compatible with the basic aims of the Treaty do not go unprotected in the period before their protection has been assured at the Community level.” Steindorff, supra note 3, at 142; Meier, “Die Lauterkeit des Handelsverkehrs,” 1993 GRUR Int. 219, 220; Martin-Ehlers, “Die Irreführungsverbote des UWG im Spannungsfeld des freien europäischen Warenverkehrs” who admittedly emphasises the structural parallels to the justifications in Art. 36 of the EC Treaty (now Art. 30 EC) 29, but recognises that the ECJ helped consumer protection and the protection against unfair competition to acquire a “Community dimension” 76 (1996); Pipkorn, supra note 21, at 24 et seq.; Koos, supra note 13, at 47, 74 et seq.; Wöhlermann, “Das Wirtschaftsrecht in der Europäischen Union” 142 (1998); Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 69, 267; Becker, in: Schwarze, supra note 5, Art. 30 EC Treaty, note 37; mandatory requirements only related to the protection of rights protected by Community law. Dissenting Springer, “Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht und die Auslegung des Irreführungsgebotes gemäß § 3 UWG” 35 (1995), who interprets the Cassis judicial practice as a means of securing the regulatory powers of the individual states. Hauschka, “Lauterkeitsrecht und Verbraucherschutz zwischen nationalem Regelungsanspruch und der Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs,” 89 ZVglRWiss 166, 174 et seq. (1990), ascribes a dual function to the Cassis judicial practice: firstly, the ECJ regulated the powers between the Community and the Member States. Secondly, the ECJ, overcoming the absence of Community law regulations, used its own development of the law to create contents by means of which a European regulation of Unfair Competition law was established. The Micklitz Study, III, 341, draws the bold conclusion from the Cassis judicial practice that Art. 28 of the European Community Treaty a priori only protected the free movement of goods. This is probably incorrect if only because of the priority solution. In its decisions, the ECJ clearly weighs the mandatory requirements of fair competition against the interest of market integration.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Decision of the ECJ, February 20, 1979, Case No. 120/78, 1979 ECR 649 — Cassis de Dijon.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Decision of the ECJ, November 26, 1985, Case No. 182/84, 1985 ECR 3781, 14 — Miro.

    Google Scholar 

  46. The direct relationship established by the ECJ between the (still) lack of positive harmonisation and the Member States’ consideration of the “mandatory requirement” is emphasised by Gormley, supra note 44, at 52; Barents, “New Developments in Measures Having Equivalent Effect,” 18 CML Rev. 271, 286 (1981); Hauschka, supra note 44, at 175; Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 70.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Cf. as example of many, Oppermann, “Europarecht” Sec. 6, note 62 et seq. (3rd ed. 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Dauses, supra Die Rechtsprechung des EuGH zum Verbraucherschutz und zur Werbefreiheit im Binnenmarkt,” 1995 EuZW 425 note 28 Ahlfeld,supra note 5, at 106.

    Google Scholar 

  49. The decision of the ECJ, February 7, 1985, Case No. 240/83, 1985 ECR 531, 13 3 — Altöle II, referred to environmental protection as an “essential objective of the Community”; see also expressly decision of the ECJ, September 20, 1988, Case No. 302/86, 1988 ECR 4607, 9 — Pfandflaschen.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Bleckmann, supra Zur Problematik der Cassis de Dijon-Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs,” 1986 GRUR Int. 172 note 35.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 250.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Decision of the ECJ, February 20, 1979, Case No. 120/78, 1979 ECR 649, 8 — Cassis de Dijon.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Gormley, supra note 44, at 52. Dissenting still, Hösl, “Interessenabwägung und rechtliche Erheblichkeit der Irreführung bei § 3 UWG” 325 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Reese, “Grenzüberschreitende Werbung in der Europäischen Gemeinschaft” 56 (1994); Dauses, supra note 28. Rüffler, “Österreichisches und europäisches Wirtschaftsprivatrecht” 65 (1998), bezeichnet das als Optimierungsproblem.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Decision of the ECJ, March 13, 1984, Case No. 16/83, 1984 ECR 1299 — Prantl.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Decision of the ECJ, December 13, 1990, Case No. C-238/89, 1990 ECR I-4827 — Pall.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Decision of the ECJ, January 16, 1992, Case No. C-373/90, 1992 ECR I-131 — Nissan.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Decision of the ECJ, February 2, 1994, Case No. C-315/92, 1994 ECR I-317, 21 — Clinique.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Decision of the ECJ, July 6, 1995, Case No. C-470/93, 1995 ECR I-1923 — Mars.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Decision of the ECJ, July 16, 1998, Case No. C-210/96, 1998 ECR I-4657 — 6-Korn.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Decision of the ECJ, January 1, 2000, Case No. C-220/98, 2000 ECR I-117 — Estée Lauder v. Lancaster.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Decision of the ECJ, April 4, 2000, Case No. C-465/98, 2000 ECR I-2297 — Darbo.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Meier, supra Die Lauterkeit des Handelsverkehrs,” 1993 GRUR Int. 219 note 44; Dethloff, supra note 18, at 192.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Decision of the ECJ, September 16, 2004, Case No. C-329/02, 2004 ECR I-8317, 24 — SAT.1.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Cf. Truchet, “Le concept du „consommateur informé“ en droit européen” 31 et seq. (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  66. müller-graff supra te 21 before arts. 28 et seq. ec te 10.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Cf. the subsequent contribution and the discussion in Kugelmann, “Werbung als Dienstleistung,” 2001 EuR 363, 374.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Decisions of the ECJ, October 1, 1987, Case No. 311/85, 1987 ECR 3801, 32 — Vlaamse Reisbureaus; March 24, 1994, Case No. C-275/92, 1994 ECR I-1039, 25 et seq. — Schindler; May 10, 1995, Case No. C-384/93, 1995 ECR I-1141 — Alpine Investments. On the limits, see Attorney General Stix-Hackl, conclusions, notes 34 et seq., to the decision of the ECJ, January 22, 2002, Case No. C-390/99, 2002 ECR I-607 — Canal Satélite.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Decision of the ECJ, November 30, 1995, Case No. C-55/94, 1995 ECR I-4165 — Gebhard.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Glöckner in: Harte-Bavendamm & Henning-Bodewig (eds.), UWG, 2004, Introduction C note 73 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Günther, “Erwünschte Regelung unerwünschter Werbung?,” 1999 CR 172, 178 comes to the conclusion that a provision that merely prohibits certain advertising measures in the domestic country does not restrict the basic freedom of the provider of the advertised services. However, this can only apply to cases in which the services are to be exported to another EEA country.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Decision of the ECJ, May 10, 1995, Case No. C-384/93, 1995 ECR I-1141 — Alpine Investments.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Decision of the ECJ, May 10, 1995, Case No. C-384/93, 1995 ECR I-1141, 32 et seq. — Alpine Investments.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Art. 36 of the Treaty on the European Economic Area, OJ L 1/3, January 3, 1994, extends the territorial scope of application of the fundamental freedoms to the European Economic Area. For linguistic reasons, the following will nevertheless only refer to the “Community” and the “Union”.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Glöckner, “‘Cold Calling’ und europäische Richtlinie zum Fernabsatz,” 2000 GRUR Int. 29, 35. Rüffler, supra note 56, at 94; Sack, “Staatliche Werbebeschränkungen und die Art. 30 und 59 EG-Vertrag,” 1998 WRP 103, 113, are of the view that Alpine Investments does not show whether the Keck doctrine was applicable to the free movement of services since it did not concern a restriction on imports but on exports. Weinand, “Europarecht und Recht gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb” 64 et seq. (1998), would transfer the principles of the Alpine Investments decision to restrictions on imports, but regards it as a restriction of the Keck doctrine. Burckhardt, “Die lauterkeitsrechtliche Beurteilung des modernen Direktmarketings” 175 (2000); Dethloff, supra note 18, at 236, derives e contrario from the decision that the Keck doctrine is to be applied to restrictions on imports. This is also suggested by the ECJ decision of January 22, 2002, Case No. C-390/99, 2002 ECR I-607, 29, 30 — Canal Satélite, but without any express comment. Holoubek, in: Schwarze, supra note 5, Art. 49 EC Treaty, note 61 would not apply the Keck doctrine to restrictions by the receiving country because the free movement of services is based on the country-of-origin principle.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Hödl, supra note 35, at 187, also assumes that the decision confirms the intention of the Keck decision

    Google Scholar 

  77. Decision of the ECJ, May 10, 1995, Case No. C-384/93, 1995 ECR I-1141, 46 — Alpine Investments.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Günther, supra Erwünschte Regelung unerwünschter Werbung?,” 1999 CR 172 note 73.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Decisions of the ECJ, April 26, 1988, Case No. 352/85, 1988 ECR 2085, 13 et seq. — Bond van Adverteerders et al.; July 9, 1997, Case No. C-34-36/95, 1997 ECR I-3843, 48 — De Agostini; October 28, 1999, Case No. C-6/98, 1999 ECR I-7599, 49 — ARD v. PRO Sieben Media AG; October 5, 2000, Case No. C-376/98, 2000 ECR I-8419, 99 — Bundesrepublik Deutschland v. Parlament und Rat; March 8, 2001, Case No. C-405/98, 2001 ECR I-1795, 37 — Konsumentombudsmannen (KO) v. Gourmet International Products AB (GIP). On this there is a clear shift of accent particularly in the efforts at harmonisation by the Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Decision of the ECJ, October 28, 1999, Case No. C-6/98, 1999 ECR I-7599, 49 — ARD v. PRO Sieben Media AG, concerned provisions restricting exports. The stricter regulations of the country of domicile for calculating the permissible duration of advertising interruptions in television programmes only disadvantages the television providers based in this country against their competitors in other Member States. However, the resulting discrimination of nationals is covered neither by the basic freedom nor by general equal treatment requirements. Cf. Attorney General Jacobs, final pleadings note 83 et seq., to decision of the ECJ, October 28, 1999, Case No. C-6/98, 1999 ECR I-7599 — ARD v. PRO Sieben Media AG; decision of the ECJ, October 28, 1999, Case No. C-6/98, 1999 ECR I-7599, 53 — ARD v. PRO Sieben Media AG.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Decisions of the ECJ, July 9, 1997, Cases No. C-34-36/95, 1997 ECR I-3843, 50 — De Agostini; March 8, 2001, Case No. C-405/98, 2001 ECR I-1795, 37 et seq. — Konsumentombudsmannen (KO) v. Gourmet International Products AB (GIP).

    Google Scholar 

  82. Kugelmann, 2001 EuR 363, 369.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Perau, “Werbeverbote im Gemeinschaftsrecht” 171 (1997). There is a difference to the effects of advertising regulations on the cross-border marketing of products. Cf. the particular justification of the lack of market neutrality in decision of the ECJ, March 8, 2001, Case No. C-405/98, 2001 ECR I-1795, 21 et seq. — Konsumentombudsmannen (KO) v. Gourmet International Products AB (GIP), and previously the reference in EFTA-GH, June 27, 1997, Case No. E-6/96, 1997 EFTA Ct. Rep. 56, 73 — Wilhelmsen. This went unnoticed by the ECJ in its justification of the Gourmet decision, March 8, 2001, Case No. C-405/98, 2001 ECR I-1795, 39 — Konsumentombudsmannen (KO) v. Gourmet International Products AB (GIP).

    Google Scholar 

  84. Decisions of the ECJ, July 9, 1997, Cases No. C-34-36/95, 1997 ECR I-3843, 51 et seq. — De Agostini; October 28, 1999, Case No. C-6/98, 1999 ECR I-7599, 50 — ARD v. PRO Sieben Media AG.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Decision of the ECJ, November 30, 1995, Case No. C-55/94, 1995 ECR I-4165 — Gebhard.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Decision of the ECJ, November 30, 1995, Case No. C-55/94, 1995 ECR I-4165, 37 — Gebhard.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Decision of the ECJ, July 9, 1997, Cases No. C-34 — 36/95, 1997 ECR I-384, 52 — De Agostini.

    Google Scholar 

  88. BVerfGE 37, 271 (1974) — So lange I.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Corte Costituzionale, December 18, 1973, published in part in 1974 EuR 255.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Decision of the ECJ, September 21, 1989, Cases Nos. 46/87 and 227/88, 1989 ECR 2859 — Hoechst.

    Google Scholar 

  91. The_EU Constitution Part II is intended to contain a separate list of fundamental rights, Treaty for a European Constitution, OJ C 310/1, December 16, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  92. beutler in von der groeben & schwarze “kommentar zum vertrag über die europäische union und zur gründung der europäischen gemeinschaft” art. 6 eu te 44 1 6th ed. 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Cf. in particular decision of the ECJ, December 9, 1997, Case No. C-265/95, 1997 ECR I-6959 — Importblockade.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Decision of the ECJ, June 12, 2003, Case No. C-112/00, 2003 ECR I-565, 74 — Schmidberger. On possible conflicts, cf. decision of the ECJ, October 14, 2004, Case No. C-36/02, 2004 ECR I-9609 — Omega.

    Google Scholar 

  95. References in Buschle, „Kommunikationsfreiheit in den Grundrechten und Grundfreiheiten des EG-Vertrages” 113, 137 et seq. (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  96. Neither the freedom of profession nor of business are guaranteed as such in the EHRC. In order to justify the freedom of profession the ECJ relies on the constitutions of the Member States. The freedom of commerce and business is specified as a concretisation of the freedom of profession, decision of the ECJ, May 14, 1974, Case No. 4/73, 1974 ECR 491, 14 — Nold.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Decision of the ECJ, March 25, 2004, Case No. C-71/02, 2004 ECR I-3025 — Karner.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Decision of the ECJ, March 25, 2004, Case No. C-71/02, 2004 ECR I-3025, 43 — Karner.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Cf. the Commission White Paper to the European Council, “Completing the Internal Market”, COM (85) 310 final, 6 note 13; and Council Resolution dated May 7, 1985 on a New Concept in the Field of Technical Harmonisation and Standardisation, OJ C 136/1, June 4, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Cf. Kur, in: Schricker & Henning-bodewig (eds.), “Neuordnung des Wettbewerbsrechts” 116, 137 (1998/99).

    Google Scholar 

  101. Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and Council of April 29, 2004 on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, OJ L 157/45, April 30, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Cf. as example Recital 2 of the Council Directive 84/450/EEC of September 10, 1984 relating to the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States concerning Misleading Advertising, OJ 1984 No. L 250/17, with the amendments that result from Art. 1 of Directive 97/55/EC of the European Parliament and Council of October 6, 1997 to Amend Directive 84/450/EEC concerning Misleading Advertising for the Purpose of Including Comparative Advertising OJ L 290/18, October 23, 1997; Zuleeg, supra note 6, Art. 3 EC, note 7.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Koos, supra note 13.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Wägenbaur, supra La législation de la Communauté Européenne en matière de concurrence déloyale,” in: “Droit européen de la concurrence déloyale en formation” 9, 14 (1994) note 4, at 9, 15, 25; Koos, supra note 13, at 84.

    Google Scholar 

  105. Recital 2 of the Council Directive 84/450/EEC of September 10, 1984 relating to the Approximation of the Laws, Regulations and Administrative Provisions of the Member States concerning Misleading Advertising, OJ L 250/17, September 19, 1984, with the amendments that result from Art. 1 of Directive 97/55/EC of the European Parliament and Council of October 6, 1997 to Amend Directive 84/450/EEC concerning Misleading Advertising for the Purpose of Including Comparative Advertising OJ L 290/18, October 23, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Steindorff, “Unvollkommener Binnenmarkt,” 158 ZHR 149, 168 (1994); KOOS, supra note 13, at 88 et seq., 126.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Decision of the ECJ, October 5, 2000, Case No. C-376/98, 2000 ECR I-8419, 83 et seq. — Bundesrepublik Deutschland v. Parlament und Rat.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Meier, supra Die Lauterkeit des Handelsverkehrs,” 1993 GRUR Int. 219, 220 note 44, at 220.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Veelken, 1993 EWS 377, 385, supra note 10.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Koos, supra note 13, at 77 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Veelken, 1993 EWS 377, 385, supra note 10. Similarly SCHLUEP, “Die Europaverträglichkeit des schweizerischen Lauterkeitsrechts,” in: “Un droit européen de la concurrence déloyale en formation?” 67, 72 (1994) sees “modules for a superordinate fair competition system” in the judicial practice on the mandatory requirements.

    Google Scholar 

  112. This was already pointed out by the early criticism by Masclet, 1980 RTDE 611, 625, of the Cassis decision. Deringer, “Zum Spannungsverhältnis zwischen den Freiheiten des Gemeinsamen Marktes und den nationalen Interessen der Mitgliedsstaaten,” in: “FS-Kutscher” 95, 100 (1981) also raised the question of the power to recognise “mandatory requirements”.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 248 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Cf. Stein, “Richterrecht wie anderswo auch?,” in: “FS-Heidelberg” 619 et seq. (1986); Everling, “Wirtschaftsverfassung und Richterrecht in der Europäischen Gemeinschaft,” in: “FSMestmäcker” 365 et seq. (1996); Ladeur, “Richterrecht und Dogmatik — eine verfehlte Konfrontation?,” 1996 KritV 77, 89 et seq. On the status of judge-made law, cf. Ohly, “Generalklausel und Richterrecht,” 201 AcP 1 et seq. (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  115. The subject of protection against unfair competition can be based directly on Art. 3 Para. 1 (g) EC in the light of its interpretation by decision of the ECJ dated May 18, 1993, Case No. C-126/91, 1993 ECR I-2361, 22 — Yves Rocher. For consumer protection, recourse can be had to Art. 3 Para. 1 (t) EC.

    Google Scholar 

  116. The Cassis decision’s function as a gap-filler has already been pointed out by Barents, supra note 47; Gormley, supra note 44, at 52; Hauschka, supra note 44, at 175. Cf. on the law-creating element of the Cassis decision, Meier, supra note 44, at 220; Martin-Ehlers, supra note 44, at 21; Wöhlermann, supra note 44, at 144; Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 253, 279.

    Google Scholar 

  117. On considerations based on jurisdiction aspects, cf. Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 247 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Cf. Scherer, “Die Wirtschaftsverfassung der EWG” 136 et seq., 137 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  119. Similarly, Schluep, supra Die Europaverträglichkeit des schweizerischen Lauterkeitsrechts,” in: “Un droit européen de la concurrence déloyale en formation?” 67, 72 (1994) note 113.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Decision of the ECJ, May 21, 1987, Case No. 249/85, 1987 ECR 2345, 12 et seq. — Albako.

    Google Scholar 

  121. Decision of the ECJ, May 21, 1987, Case No. 249/85, 1987 ECR 2345, 16 — Albako.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. German and European Private and Commercial Law, University of Constance, Constance

    Jochen Glöckner (Prof. Dr. iur. LL.M. (USA), Professor)

Authors
  1. Jochen Glöckner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, Marstallplatz 1, 80539, Munich, Germany

    Reto M. Hilty  & Frauke Henning-Bodewig  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Glöckner, J. (2007). The Law Against Unfair Competition and the EC Treaty. In: Hilty, R.M., Henning-Bodewig, F. (eds) Law Against Unfair Competition. MPI Studies on Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, vol 1. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71882-6_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation