The Triangular Relationship between the Commission, NRAs and National Courts Revisited



136


COMMUNICATIONS
«.STRATEGIES


No. 64, 4th Q. 2006


the primary responsibility for the implementation of the regulatory framework
in principle leave it to member states to devise the judicial structures within
which such decisions can be challenged. However, in electronic
communications regulation, the need for a proper judicial review mechanism
was felt strongly enough to warrant that a number of procedural rules be
fixed in EC law directly, at Article 4. The mechanisms of both Article 4 and
Article 7 offer a check on the considerable discretion and wide competences
of NRAs: Article 7 allows the Commission to safeguard certain interests
(internal market, Community law) in the course of the decision-making
procedure, while Article 4 calls upon national courts to ensure
ex post overall
control of the finished end-product.

Accordingly, whilst accountability is the basic concern, this section will
take judicial review by national courts as a starting point, in order to discuss:
the interpretation of a ‘challengeable act' (a); the court or tribunal with
jurisdiction to review the challenged act (b); the proper breadth and depth of
judicial review (c); and finally, the effectiveness of judicial review (d).

For which acts should authorities be accountable?

The conventional view would suggest that since only NRA decisions at
the end of the chain actually affect the rights and obligations of individual
undertakings directly, accountability would be sufficiently ensured via judicial
review of these. This view, however, ignores the practical realities of
regulation in the electronic communications sector. NRA decisions are
greatly influenced by activities that take place earlier in the decision-making
chain.

Firstly, Commission recommendations and guidelines (hereinafter the
"Commission soft-law instruments") determine the scope and exercise of
NRA actions. Articles 14(2) and 15(3) of Directive 2002/21 expressly provide
that NRAs must take these measures into account when carrying out the
SMP exercise 27. The Commission has indicated that the extent to which
NRAs have indeed done so is an important factor in the assessment of the

27 See also Article 19 of Directive 2002/21, calling upon NRAs to take the utmost account of
recommendations issued under that legal basis. It should be noted that it is thus the Community
legislature obliging NRAs to take into account soft law instruments, adding considerable legal
force to this duty.



More intriguing information

1. Structural Breakpoints in Volatility in International Markets
2. Estimating the Impact of Medication on Diabetics' Diet and Lifestyle Choices
3. Review of “The Hesitant Hand: Taming Self-Interest in the History of Economic Ideas”
4. Automatic Dream Sentiment Analysis
5. The Shepherd Sinfonia
6. The name is absent
7. Achieving the MDGs – A Note
8. Changing spatial planning systems and the role of the regional government level; Comparing the Netherlands, Flanders and England
9. The name is absent
10. Multi-Agent System Interaction in Integrated SCM
11. DURABLE CONSUMPTION AS A STATUS GOOD: A STUDY OF NEOCLASSICAL CASES
12. Implementation of Rule Based Algorithm for Sandhi-Vicheda Of Compound Hindi Words
13. Micro-strategies of Contextualization Cross-national Transfer of Socially Responsible Investment
14. Eigentumsrechtliche Dezentralisierung und institutioneller Wettbewerb
15. On the Relation between Robust and Bayesian Decision Making
16. Does Market Concentration Promote or Reduce New Product Introductions? Evidence from US Food Industry
17. ALTERNATIVE TRADE POLICIES
18. The name is absent
19. Human Rights Violations by the Executive: Complicity of the Judiciary in Cameroon?
20. TINKERING WITH VALUATION ESTIMATES: IS THERE A FUTURE FOR WILLINGNESS TO ACCEPT MEASURES?