.gif){kind=small}
BACK TO HOME
PAGE BACK TO HOME
PAGE EUROPEAN REVIEW
Over the past few months the Commission's Competition directorate has taken action against firms such as Coca-Cola and British Airways. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is also busy with Member States who fail to implement social legislation. The European Review investigates how these procedures work and who benefits.
Keeping an eye on competition is becoming one of the key roles of government as firms merge and expand in the hope of dominating rapidly growing international markets. The route to profit puts many companies on a collision course with the authorities responsible for protecting the interests of the consumer. In July European Commission inspectors raided Coca-Cola premises in the UK, Germany, Austria and Denmark, and seized documents after they received a tip-off claiming that the American drinks giant was abusing its position in the market. It is alleged that Coca- Cola has been enticing retailers to push its products and stop stocking competitors by offering them incentives. The Competition directorate also fined British Airways almost £4.5million for running schemes designed to persuade travel agents to favour its flights over other airlines. BA is appealing to the European Court of Justice but a battle with the EU will always be tough and costly.
Meanwhile the Commission has been bringing cases against Member States who have infringed labour and social directives by not transposing them correctly into national law. As regards social legislation the EU says 'The average figure for compliance by the Member States, with the 55 Directives in force, in the social field, has increased from 90.5% in July 1997 to 95.8% in July 1999. 44 of these Directives (86.2%) have been transposed in all the Member States'. This improving record masks some back-sliders however: 'On the other hand, Italy and Luxembourg have a relatively low number of directives transposed (83.6%) and are facing respectively four and five cases in the ECJ. France also could face three ECJ rulings in the coming months for the three directives still not transposed in French law'. Six Member States (Denmark, Germany, Spain, Finland, Sweden and the UK) have a 100% record and three other States (Belgium, the Netherlands and Portugal) are very close to completion (98.1%).
In the field of labour law the chief culprits when it comes to non-implementation of directives seem to be Italy, Greece, Ireland and the Netherlands. The Transfer of Undertakings directive (TUPE) has been incorrectly restricted in Italy where any firm taking over from another in 'economic crisis' is not obliged to take on the workers of the previous company and in Ireland the penalties for not informing employees of a transfer are deemed insufficient. In Greece and Ireland too collective redundancy legislation does not ensure that sufficient information is given to the workers involved. Let's have a look at how the procedures work that can lead to the EU fining companies and taking countries to court. Under articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty of Rome, which set up the Community, anti-competitive practices and concerted practices are prohibited as is abuse of dominant positions. The Competitions Directorate of the European Commission derives its powers from these articles. The policy of the directorate, as set out in reports in 1993 and 1995 is to enforce true competition as a means to stimulating growth and new jobs. As we have seen the directorate can fine infringing companies and these have gone as high as €132 million. It has gradually extended its operations into areas such as telecommunications and public transport which were formally thought of as belonging to state-aided monopolies. Article 90 gives it scope to investigate any exclusive or special rights given by Member States. However there is a defence on 'public benefit' grounds and 'block exemptions' can be granted. As we have seen any fines can be appealed to the ECJ.
As regards Member States not implementing directives the Commission can issue 'reasoned opinions'. This amounts to a final warning to them that they have two months to adopt the required measures. If they fail to do so, the Commission brings a case before the European Court of Justice.
One of the EU's principal pieces of environmental legislation, is the directive (85/337/EEC ) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. It requires Member States to provide for the environmental impact assessment of a wide range of projects before they are authorised. The necessary national legislation should have been in place by July 1988. Spain, Portugal and the United Kingdom have not completed this. In the case of the U.K., the law in Scotland does not provide for international consultation in case a project is likely to have significant effects on the environment of another Member State. Under Article 228 of the EC Treaty the Commission will seek to bring these countries before the European Court of Justice.
The Commission has decided to bring Italy before the ECJ for not transposing into national law by June 1998 the Parental Leave Directive(96/34/EC) and the Biological Agents Directives (97/59/EC, 97/65/EC). It will also send reasoned opinions to the Italian government regarding late transposition of the Second Work Equipment Directive (95/63/EC).
Austria will face legal proceedings in the ECJ regarding the late transposition of Directive 95/30/EC concerning the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to biological agents at work . The national government will also receive a reasoned opinion for non-implementation of the same Biological Agents Directives as Italy.
In the field of labour law, as mentioned in the main article, reasoned opinions will be sent to Italy concerning TUPE and Ireland and Greece with respect to the directive on collective redundancies (98/59/EC). The Netherlands will receive one relating to unemployment benefit regulations.
|
Back to |
Forward to |
Up to |
Back to |
