Deutsche Telekom v. Commission
European Union Court of Justice
2008 E.C.R. II-477 (2008)
- Written by Kelli Lanski, JD
Facts
Deutsche Telekom (DT) (defendant) was a German telecommunications operator, providing several telecommunications options to wholesale customers (other telecommunications operators) and retail customers (individual subscribers). DT held a legal monopoly in the retail space until new regulations opened the market to competition in 1996. DT was subject to pricing and conduct rules set by a German telecommunications regulator, the Federal Ministry of Post and Telecommunications (BMPT). DT’s wholesale and retail prices were a combination of monthly subscription charges and one-time fees. BMPT set suggested charges, with which DT complied. The European Commission (the commission) (plaintiff) found that DT held a dominant position in the relevant telecommunications product and service markets. The commission also found that DT had abused its dominance in violation of Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) by charging abusive prices and engaging in a market squeeze by charging its wholesale customers higher prices than its retail customers. That meant that wholesale customers would need to charge their retail customers higher prices than DT charged its retail customers in order to make a profit. DT argued that it could not have engaged in abusive pricing because its wholesale charges were set by its regulator, BMPT, and appealed the commission’s findings.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.