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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
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.
Fikentscher, “Das Verhältnis von Kartellrecht und Recht des unlauteren Wettbewerbs im deutschen und europäischen Recht,” in: “Festschrift für Walter Hallstein” 127, 151 (1982).
Steindorff, “Unlauterer Wettbewerb im System des EG-Rechts,” 1993 WRP 139.
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).
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
Veelken, 1993 EWS 377, supra note 10.
Hucke, “Erforderlichkeit einer Harmonisierung des Wettbewerbsrechts in Europa” 39 et seq. (2001).
Koos, “Europäischer Lauterkeitsmaßstab und globale Integration” 21 et seq., 24 (1996).
Decision of the ECJ, January 29, 1985, Case No. 231/83, 1985 ECR 305, 10 — Fuel prices.
Decision of the ECJ, May 18, 1993, Case No. C-126/91, 1993 ECR I-2361, 22 — Yves Rocher.
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).
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.
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.
Decision of the ECJ, March 13, 1984, Case No. 16/83, 1984 ECR 1299, 33 — Prantl.
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).
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).
Decision of the ECJ, July 11, 1974, Case No. 8/74, 1974 ECR 837 — Dassonville.
Decision of the ECJ, July 11, 1974, Case No. 8/74, 1974 ECR 837, 5 — Dassonville.
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.
On the development of the concept, cf. Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 26 et seq.
Novak, “Ungleichbehandlung von ausländischen Produkten oder Dienstleistungen — Einheitliche Rechtfertigungstatbestände im EG-Vertrag,” 1997 DB 2589, 2590.
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.”
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”.
Decision of the ECJ, November 26, 1985, Case No. 182/84, 1985 ECR 3781 — Miro.
Decision of the ECJ, May 18, 1993, Case No. C-126/91, 1993 ECR I-2361 — Yves Rocher.
Decision of the ECJ, November 26, 1985, Case No. 182/84, 1985 ECR 3781 — Miro.
Decision of the ECJ, May 18, 1993, Case No. C-126/91, 1993 ECR I-2361, 22 — Yves Rocher.
Klauer, “Die Europäisierung des Privatrechts — Der EuGH als Zivilrichter”, 359 (1997). Dissenting GÜlbay, “Vergleichende Werbung, Subsidiarität und Europa” 212 et seq. (1997).
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.
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.
Novak, supra Ungleichbehandlung von ausländischen Produkten oder Dienstleistungen — Einheitliche Rechtfertigungstatbestände im EG-Vertrag,” 1997 DB 2589 note 26.
E.g. decision of the ECJ, March 12, 1987, Case No. 178/84, 1987 ECR 1227, 30 et seq., 38 et seq. — Reinheitsgebot.
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.
In this sense also Hucke, supra note 12, at 57: vertical distribution of powers.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Decision of the ECJ, February 20, 1979, Case No. 120/78, 1979 ECR 649 — Cassis de Dijon.
Decision of the ECJ, November 26, 1985, Case No. 182/84, 1985 ECR 3781, 14 — Miro.
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.
Cf. as example of many, Oppermann, “Europarecht” Sec. 6, note 62 et seq. (3rd ed. 2005).
Dauses, supra Die Rechtsprechung des EuGH zum Verbraucherschutz und zur Werbefreiheit im Binnenmarkt,” 1995 EuZW 425 note 28 Ahlfeld,supra note 5, at 106.
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.
Bleckmann, supra Zur Problematik der Cassis de Dijon-Rechtsprechung des Europäischen Gerichtshofs,” 1986 GRUR Int. 172 note 35.
Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 250.
Decision of the ECJ, February 20, 1979, Case No. 120/78, 1979 ECR 649, 8 — Cassis de Dijon.
Gormley, supra note 44, at 52. Dissenting still, Hösl, “Interessenabwägung und rechtliche Erheblichkeit der Irreführung bei § 3 UWG” 325 (1986).
Reese, “Grenzüberschreitende Werbung in der Europäischen Gemeinschaft” 56 (1994); Dauses, supra note 28. Rüffler, “Österreichisches und europäisches Wirtschaftsprivatrecht” 65 (1998), bezeichnet das als Optimierungsproblem.
Decision of the ECJ, March 13, 1984, Case No. 16/83, 1984 ECR 1299 — Prantl.
Decision of the ECJ, December 13, 1990, Case No. C-238/89, 1990 ECR I-4827 — Pall.
Decision of the ECJ, January 16, 1992, Case No. C-373/90, 1992 ECR I-131 — Nissan.
Decision of the ECJ, February 2, 1994, Case No. C-315/92, 1994 ECR I-317, 21 — Clinique.
Decision of the ECJ, July 6, 1995, Case No. C-470/93, 1995 ECR I-1923 — Mars.
Decision of the ECJ, July 16, 1998, Case No. C-210/96, 1998 ECR I-4657 — 6-Korn.
Decision of the ECJ, January 1, 2000, Case No. C-220/98, 2000 ECR I-117 — Estée Lauder v. Lancaster.
Decision of the ECJ, April 4, 2000, Case No. C-465/98, 2000 ECR I-2297 — Darbo.
Meier, supra Die Lauterkeit des Handelsverkehrs,” 1993 GRUR Int. 219 note 44; Dethloff, supra note 18, at 192.
Decision of the ECJ, September 16, 2004, Case No. C-329/02, 2004 ECR I-8317, 24 — SAT.1.
Cf. Truchet, “Le concept du „consommateur informé“ en droit européen” 31 et seq. (2000).
müller-graff supra te 21 before arts. 28 et seq. ec te 10.
Cf. the subsequent contribution and the discussion in Kugelmann, “Werbung als Dienstleistung,” 2001 EuR 363, 374.
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.
Decision of the ECJ, November 30, 1995, Case No. C-55/94, 1995 ECR I-4165 — Gebhard.
Glöckner in: Harte-Bavendamm & Henning-Bodewig (eds.), UWG, 2004, Introduction C note 73 et seq.
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.
Decision of the ECJ, May 10, 1995, Case No. C-384/93, 1995 ECR I-1141 — Alpine Investments.
Decision of the ECJ, May 10, 1995, Case No. C-384/93, 1995 ECR I-1141, 32 et seq. — Alpine Investments.
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”.
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.
Hödl, supra note 35, at 187, also assumes that the decision confirms the intention of the Keck decision
Decision of the ECJ, May 10, 1995, Case No. C-384/93, 1995 ECR I-1141, 46 — Alpine Investments.
Günther, supra Erwünschte Regelung unerwünschter Werbung?,” 1999 CR 172 note 73.
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.
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.
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).
Kugelmann, 2001 EuR 363, 369.
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).
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.
Decision of the ECJ, November 30, 1995, Case No. C-55/94, 1995 ECR I-4165 — Gebhard.
Decision of the ECJ, November 30, 1995, Case No. C-55/94, 1995 ECR I-4165, 37 — Gebhard.
Decision of the ECJ, July 9, 1997, Cases No. C-34 — 36/95, 1997 ECR I-384, 52 — De Agostini.
BVerfGE 37, 271 (1974) — So lange I.
Corte Costituzionale, December 18, 1973, published in part in 1974 EuR 255.
Decision of the ECJ, September 21, 1989, Cases Nos. 46/87 and 227/88, 1989 ECR 2859 — Hoechst.
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.
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.
Cf. in particular decision of the ECJ, December 9, 1997, Case No. C-265/95, 1997 ECR I-6959 — Importblockade.
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.
References in Buschle, „Kommunikationsfreiheit in den Grundrechten und Grundfreiheiten des EG-Vertrages” 113, 137 et seq. (2004).
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.
Decision of the ECJ, March 25, 2004, Case No. C-71/02, 2004 ECR I-3025 — Karner.
Decision of the ECJ, March 25, 2004, Case No. C-71/02, 2004 ECR I-3025, 43 — Karner.
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.
Cf. Kur, in: Schricker & Henning-bodewig (eds.), “Neuordnung des Wettbewerbsrechts” 116, 137 (1998/99).
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.
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.
Koos, supra note 13.
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.
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.
Steindorff, “Unvollkommener Binnenmarkt,” 158 ZHR 149, 168 (1994); KOOS, supra note 13, at 88 et seq., 126.
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.
Meier, supra Die Lauterkeit des Handelsverkehrs,” 1993 GRUR Int. 219, 220 note 44, at 220.
Veelken, 1993 EWS 377, 385, supra note 10.
Koos, supra note 13, at 77 et seq.
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.
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”.
Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 248 et seq.
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).
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.
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.
On considerations based on jurisdiction aspects, cf. Ahlfeld, supra note 5, at 247 et seq.
Cf. Scherer, “Die Wirtschaftsverfassung der EWG” 136 et seq., 137 (1970).
Similarly, Schluep, supra Die Europaverträglichkeit des schweizerischen Lauterkeitsrechts,” in: “Un droit européen de la concurrence déloyale en formation?” 67, 72 (1994) note 113.
Decision of the ECJ, May 21, 1987, Case No. 249/85, 1987 ECR 2345, 12 et seq. — Albako.
Decision of the ECJ, May 21, 1987, Case No. 249/85, 1987 ECR 2345, 16 — Albako.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights 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
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71882-6_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-71881-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-71882-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)