header-logo header-logo

Telco headache

16 August 2007 / Benoit Reillier , Matthew Bennett
Issue: 7286 / Categories: Features , EU
printer mail-detail

Does the “new” EU regulatory framework spell the end of integrated telecoms companies? ask Matthew Bennett and Benoit Reillier

The current EU telecoms regulatory framework, the so-called 2003 new regulatory framework (NRF), is now four years old. However, a “new” NRF will be proposed before the end of the year. There is currently a consultation (see www.ec.europa.eu./information_society/policy/ecomm/tomorrow/index_en.htm) to revisit the 2003 NRF, which is trying to capture the views of various stakeholders in the market to update the framework, adapt it to new markets and technological realities, and remove some of the provisions that are no longer relevant.

The current NRF contains a set of approaches and methodologies that EU member states need to follow. As part of the framework, the European Commission lists the remedies available to the national regulatory authorities (NRA) to curb the dominance of firms with significant market power. While national regulatory authorities are allowed to propose their own market definitions or remedies if they believe their national circumstances require them to deviate from the framework, this option

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hamlins—Maddox Legal

Hamlins—Maddox Legal

London firm announces acquisition of corporate team

Ward Hadaway—Nik Tunley

Ward Hadaway—Nik Tunley

Head of corporate appointed following Teesside merger

Taylor Rose—Russell Jarvis

Taylor Rose—Russell Jarvis

Firm expands into banking and finance sector with newly appointed head of banking

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll