Vertically integrated operators with significant market power (SMP) may have incentives to discriminate in favour of their own retail services. For example, by applying better wholesale prices internally, or by giving their retail services access to more or better information or systems.
National regulatory authorities (NRAs) may impose a non-discrimination obligation to prevent such behaviour. This obligation can be based on equivalence of inputs (EoI) or equivalence of outputs (EoO). To ensure compliance with this obligation, NRAs may consider imposing some form of separation.
Cullen International has published an infographic summarising whether separation is applicable at wholesale level (download) and, if applicable, the model of separation in Czech Republic, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Spain, Sweden and UK.
The overview covers:
1) Models of separation based on the following criteria:
- Functional separation: physically separated staff, systems and processes
- Legal separation: separate legal entity remaining under the same overall ownership, physically separated staff, systems and processes.
- Structural separation: separate legal entity with different ownership.
2) Whether the model of separation was mandated by the NRA or voluntary proposed by the vertically integrated operator.
3) The equivalence of access model: equivalence of input (EoI) or equivalence of output (EoO).
4) Whether compliance with a stricter form of non-discrimination resulted in a less stringent regulatory treatment elsewhere (e.g. withdrawal of ex ante price control).
more news
04 November 26
In nine European countries, national symmetric obligations on access to ducts go beyond the scope set by the Gigabit Infrastructure Act
Cullen International's latest benchmark analyses asymmetric and symmetric duct access obligations in Europe.
04 November 26
More than 60 cases and counting: a snapshot of European antitrust enforcement against big tech
Cullen International’s latest report on past and pending antitrust cases against big tech companies in Europe tracks enforcement activity under ex post antitrust rules at EU and national level.
30 October 26
Many governments around the globe rely on legal mechanisms to compel communications apps to cooperate in law enforcement investigations
Cullen International's latest Global Trends benchmark for number-independent communications apps regulation found that nearly all of the 13 surveyed jurisdictions around the world provide some legal mechanism to make these apps assist law enforcement in criminal investigations. There are requirements to verify user identities, compel disclosure of stored content, make encrypted content accessible, and duties to detect illegal content within private communications.