Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Effective
competition
provides
goods
and
services
at
cut
prices,
raises
quality
and
expands
customer
choice.
The
purpose
of
competition
law
is
to
ensure
that
all
economic
actors,
pursuant
of
their
activities,
do
not
prevent
the
established
Common
Market
within
the
EU
from
creating
an
open
market
of
services
and
goods.
Articles
101
and
102
of
the
Treaty
on
the
Functioning
of
the
European
Union
help
ensure
that
Article
3(1)(g)
EC
requiring
a
‘system
ensuring
that
competition
in
the
Common
Market
is
not
distorted’
is
upheld.
They
prohibit
any
decisions
between
undertakings
and
associations
which
have
the
object
or
effect
of
affecting
trade
between
member
states.
Competition
law
and
anti-‐competitive
restrictions
on
trade
has
been
hurtled
into
the
lime-‐light
recently
with
the
case
of
Karen
Murphy.
Facts
aside,
one
of
the
main
issues
of
this
case
is
whether
Sky
and
the
English
Premier
League
have
been
acting
in
an
anti-‐competitive
way
in
restricting
the
competition
between
other
broadcasters
who
may
bid,
or
wish
to
bid,
for
the
rights
to
show
live
premier
league
games
in
the
UK.
Sky
currently
own
5
of
the
6
broadcasting
rights
offered
by
the
Premier
League.
This
is
largely
down
to
an
agreement
made
with
the
European
Commission
in
2005
which
stated
that
no
one
broadcaster
could
own
all
of
the
rights;
it
is
arguable
that
without
this
agreement
that
Sky
could
own
all
of
the
packages
available
from
the
Premier
League.
In
addition,
Sky
and
the
Premier
League
have
an
exclusivity
agreement
which
allows
Sky
to
match
the
financial
term
of
any
bid
from
any
third
party
when
renewing
the
agreement.
The
question
for
the
ECJ
in
the
forthcoming
case
is
whether
this
is
a
specific
breach
of
Articles
101
and
102,
in
which
Sky
can
be
seen
to
be
acting
in
an
anti-‐competitive
way,
specifically
in
restricting
consumer
choice
and
creating
a
barrier
in
the
Common
Market.
As
early
as
1966,
the
ECJ
ruled
on
the
legality
of
a
similar
exclusivity
agreement
in
Case
56/65
Societe
La
Technique
Miniere
v
Maschinenbau
Ulm
GmbH.
It
came
to
the
conclusion
that
an
exclusivity
agreement
which
affects
the
trade
between
Member
States
could
be
an
infringement
of
Article
101
TFEU
(then
Article
85).
In
the
immediate
case,
the
ECJ
must
decide
whether
the
exclusivity
agreement
between
Sky
and
the
English
Premier
League
affects
the
functioning
of
the
Common
Market.
The
Advocate
General,
Julianne
Kolkot,
has
already
given
her
opinion
on
the
case.
She
believes
that
the
agreement
is
an
infringement
of
the
Articles,
and
the
ultimately
the
real
‘losers’
are
the
consumers
–
the
football
fans
in
the
UK
who
can
only
view
live
Premier
League
matches
in
full
if
they
subscribe
to
Sky.
Ultimately,
the
decision
is
up
to
the
European
Court
of
Justice.
If
a
decision
does
go
in
favour
of
Ms
Murphy,
we
could
see
a
revolution
in
broadcasting
rights
not
just
in
the
UK,
but
throughout
the
EU.