IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00719094.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

De la notion de responsabilité particulière de l'opérateur dominant dans la politique de concurrence européenne: quelles conséquences sur les libertés économiques?

Author

Listed:
  • Frédéric Marty

    () (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis - UCA - Université Côte d'Azur - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UCA - Université Côte d'Azur)

Abstract

Cette contribution s'interroge sur l'impact de la politique européenne de concurrence sur les droits de propriété des opérateurs dominants et sur leur liberté contractuelle. Non seulement pèse sur ces derniers la notion de responsabilité particulière vis-à-vis de la préservation d'une structure de marché de concurrence effective mais de plus la Commission peut prononcer au titre de sanction pour abus de position dominante un certain nombre de mesures correctives de nature comportementale ou de nature structurelle, posant la question du respect de leurs droits fondamentaux. Le document de travail évalue ces remèdes à l'aune de l'efficacité économique et du respect des droits dans le cadre de décisions contentieuses (article 7 du règlement n°1/2003) pour le cas des actifs intangibles au travers de l'application de la théorie des facilités essentielles. En conclusion, nous nous attachons au cas des mesures structurelles faisant l'objet d'une décision rendant obligatoire des engagements volontaires (article 9 du règlement 1/2003). En prenant l'exemple du secteur énergétique européen et des cessions de réseaux de transports de gaz ou d'électricité , nous nous interrogeons sur la question du contrôle de la proportionnalité de ces engagements et des risques sous-jacents de voir les règles de concurrence devenir des instruments de régulation des marchés

Suggested Citation

  • Frédéric Marty, 2012. "De la notion de responsabilité particulière de l'opérateur dominant dans la politique de concurrence européenne: quelles conséquences sur les libertés économiques?," Post-Print halshs-00719094, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00719094 Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00719094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00719094/document
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Besley, Timothy & Case, Anne, 1995. "Incumbent Behavior: Vote-Seeking, Tax-Setting, and Yardstick Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 25-45, March.
    2. Lorenz Blume & Stefan Voigt, 2011. "Federalism and decentralization—a critical survey of frequently used indicators," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 238-264, September.
    3. Jin, Jing & Zou, Heng-fu, 2002. "How does fiscal decentralization affect aggregate, national, and subnational government size?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 270-293, September.
    4. John Ashworth & Benny Geys & Bruno Heyndels, 2005. "Government Weakness and Local Public Debt Development in Flemish Municipalities," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 12(4), pages 395-422, August.
    5. Ernesto Stein, 1999. "Fiscal Decentralization and Government Size in Latin America," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 2, pages 357-391, November.
    6. Ashworth, John & Geys, Benny & Heyndels, Bruno, 2006. "Determinants of tax innovation: The case of environmental taxes in Flemish municipalities," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 223-247, March.
    7. Kaddour Hadri, 2000. "Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data," Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 3(2), pages 148-161.
    8. Enikolopov, Ruben & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2007. "Decentralization and political institutions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 2261-2290.
    9. Oates, Wallace E, 1985. "Searching for Leviathan: An Empirical Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 748-757, September.
    10. Jon H. Fiva, 2005. "New Evidence on Fiscal Decentralization and the Size of Government," CESifo Working Paper Series 1615, CESifo Group Munich.
    11. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Why Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(5), pages 997-1032, October.
    12. Brennan,Geoffrey & Buchanan,James M., 2006. "The Power to Tax," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521027922, March.
    13. Arzaghi, Mohammad & Henderson, J. Vernon, 2005. "Why countries are fiscally decentralizing," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(7), pages 1157-1189, July.
    14. Perron, Pierre, 1988. "Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series : Further evidence from a new approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 12(2-3), pages 297-332.
    15. Dan Stegarescu, 2005. "Public sector decentralisation: measurement concepts and recent international trends," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 26(3), pages 301-333, September.
    16. Fan, C. Simon & Lin, Chen & Treisman, Daniel, 2009. "Political decentralization and corruption: Evidence from around the world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(1-2), pages 14-34, February.
    17. Rodden, Jonathan, 2003. "Reviving Leviathan: Fiscal Federalism and the Growth of Government," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(04), pages 695-729, September.
    18. Jørn Rattsø & Per Tovmo, 2002. "Fiscal Discipline and Asymmetric Adjustment of Revenues and Expenditures: Local Government Responses to Shocks in Denmark," Public Finance Review, , vol. 30(3), pages 208-234, May.
    19. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
    20. Keen, Michael & Marchand, Maurice, 1997. "Fiscal competition and the pattern of public spending," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 33-53, October.
    21. Dilip Mookherjee & Pranab K. Bardhan, 2000. "Capture and Governance at Local and National Levels," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 135-139, May.
    22. Philip Grossman, 1989. "Fiscal decentralization and government size: An extension," Public Choice, Springer, pages 63-69.
    23. Moesen, Wim & van Cauwenberge, Philippe, 2000. "The Status of the Budget Constraint, Federalism and the Relative Size of Government: A Bureaucracy Approach," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 104(3-4), pages 207-224, September.
    24. Pedroni, Peter, 1999. " Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(0), pages 653-670, Special I.
    25. Salmon, Pierre, 1987. "Decentralisation as an Incentive Scheme," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 24-43, Summer.
    26. McCoskey, Suzanne & Kao, Chihwa, 1999. " Testing the Stability of a Production Function with Urbanization as a Shift Factor," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(0), pages 671-690, Special I.
    27. Zodrow, George R. & Mieszkowski, Peter, 1986. "Pigou, Tiebout, property taxation, and the underprovision of local public goods," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 356-370, May.
    28. Wilson, John D., 1986. "A theory of interregional tax competition," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 296-315, May.
    29. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 1994. "Does centralization increase the size of government?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 765-773, April.
    30. Tanzi, Vito, 2002. "Globalization and the Future of Social Protection," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 49(1), pages 116-127, February.
    31. George Crowley & Russell Sobel, 2011. "Does fiscal decentralization constrain Leviathan? New evidence from local property tax competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 5-30, October.
    32. Bordignon, Massimo & Turati, Gilberto, 2009. "Bailing out expectations and public health expenditure," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 305-321, March.
    33. Jean-Michel Josselin & Fabio Padovano & Yvon Rocaboy, 2012. "Fiscal rules vs. political culture as determinants of soft budget spending behaviors," Post-Print halshs-00706980, HAL.
    34. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Do constitutions cause large governments? Quasi-experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 908-918, May.
    35. Weingast, Barry R, 1995. "The Economic Role of Political Institutions: Market-Preserving Federalism and Economic Development," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 1-31, April.
    36. Panizza, Ugo, 1999. "On the determinants of fiscal centralization: Theory and evidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 97-139, October.
    37. Padovano, Fabio & Venturi, Larissa, 2001. "Wars of Attrition in Italian Government Coalitions and Fiscal Performance: 1948-1994," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 109(1-2), pages 15-54, October.
    38. Alesina, Alberto & Drazen, Allan, 1991. "Why Are Stabilizations Delayed?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1170-1188, December.
    39. Robert P. Inman & Daniel L. Rubinfeld, 1997. "Rethinking Federalism," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 43-64, Fall.
    40. Strumpf, Koleman S, 2002. " Does Government Decentralization Increase Policy Innovation?," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 4(2), pages 207-241.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00719094. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.