WRITTEN QUESTION E-0284/03 by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission. Abuse of a dominant position.
Date: 2003-02-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Scotland, application of EU law, dominant position, interpretation of the law, sports body

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/17

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(20 March 2003)

The Commission is aware of the allegedly abusive refusals by the mobile operators Vodafone and
In July 2002 OniWay
to conclude interconnection agreements with OniWay.
SonaeCom (Optimus)
submitted two complaints to the Commission against those two operators, in parallel with its proceedings
pending before the Portuguese regulator (Anacom).

Contrary to the three GSM mobile operators in Portugal, OniWay had only third generation (3G)
frequencies and had not yet deployed its network. It was, therefore, seeking an agreement with the existing
operators to provide services making use of their networks. OniWay reached a commercial agreement with
TMN, the mobile subsidiary of Portugal Telecom. On 20 June 2002 Anacom determined that the two
other mobile operators, Vodafone and Optimus, should conclude interconnection agreements with
OniWay. However, they refused to comply with this decision arguing that they were under Portuguese
law not obliged to interconnect to OniWay as long as the latter did not operate its 3G service.

For this reason, OniWay subsequently filed the above complaints with the Commission under Article 82 of
the EC Treaty at the end of July 2002.

However, on 24 September 2002 Anacom required Vodafone and Optimus by decision to provide
interconnection to OniWay within 15 calendar days.

The decision of Anacom seemed to guarantee interconnection and the related termination access which
was the subject of OniWay’s complaints to the Commission, and OniWay was therefore asked whether it
still maintained its complaints. The Commission, however, never received an answer to this question.

In November 2002 the Commission learned informally about the liquidation of OniWay.

The Commission does not have any indication to conclude that such liquidation constitutes a possible
breach of Community Competition Law.

(2004/C 51 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0284/03

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(7 February 2003)

Subject: Abuse of a dominant position

Under Article 82, one or more undertakings cannot abuse a dominant position within the common
market. Would the Commission comment on the abuse of a dominant position by two undertakings in
Scotland, i.e. Glasgow Rangers and Glasgow Celtic, to the detriment of all other football teams in the
country?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2003)

It is true that one or more undertakings are prohibited from abusing a dominant position within the
common market, where that abuse has an appreciable effect on trade between Member States.

However, such a finding in a particular case requires detailed factual and legal assessment. The
Commission must examine the markets on which the undertakings operate,
the
undertakings on that market, the behaviour which is alleged to be abusive, and the effect on trade of
that behaviour. The question provides no information that could allow the Commission to identify the
subject matter of the alleged abuse.

the position of

In the absence of more detailed information, the Commission cannot comment on the alleged behaviour of
Glasgow Rangers and Glasgow Celtic.