Advertisement

Member State Interests and the EU Law on Unfair B2C and B2B Practices

  • Monika NamysłowskaEmail author
  • Agnieszka Jabłonowska
Chapter

Abstract

The law against unfair business-to-consumer and business-to-business practices in the EU is an area where the interests of the European Union and those of its Member States interact rather intensively. On the one hand, the Union, as well as its Member States, strive to achieve the relevant common policy objectives. On the other, national governments are keen to preserve their authority in defining the desirable standard of competition and consumer protection. The gradual harmonisation of the law has led to an expansion of the EU’s interests, inevitably creating tensions with interests of the Member States. There are visible discrepancies between the expectations of the Member States when they agreed, by offering concessions, to the furthering of EU policy in this domain and the ultimate position taken by the EU’s interests vis-à-vis those safeguarded by the Member States. Overall it is questionable whether an appropriate balance has been established between the EU’s predominantly market-related policy goals and the complex array of national interests in the analysed field.

References

  1. Balogh, V., & Cseres, K. J. (2013). Institutional design in Hungary: A case study of the unfair commercial practices directive. Journal of Consumer Policy, 36(3), 343–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baquero Cruz, J. (2002). Between competition and free movement: The economic constitutional law of the European Community. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Cafaggi, F. (2013). From a status to a transaction-based approach? Institutional design in European contract law. Common Market Law Review, 50, 311–329.Google Scholar
  4. Cafaggi, F., & Iamiceli, P. (2017). The principles of effectiveness, proportionality and dissuasiveness in the enforcement of EU consumer law: The impact of a triad on the choice of civil remedies and administrative sanctions. European Review of Private Law, 25, 575–618.Google Scholar
  5. Caro de Sousa, P. (2012). Negative and positive integration in EU economic law: Between strategic denial and cognitive dissonance? German Law Journal, 13, 979–1011.Google Scholar
  6. Collins, H. (2009). The European economic constitution and the constitutional dimension of private law. European Review of Contract Law, 5, 71–94.Google Scholar
  7. Council of the European Union. (2004a). Council common position for adopting a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Unfair Commercial Practices Directive), Doc. 11630/2/2004.Google Scholar
  8. Council of the European Union. (2004b). Council statements made in procedure 2003/0134(COD) Consumer protection: Unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices, 14166/2004.Google Scholar
  9. Council of the European Union. (2016). Council conclusions – Strengthening the farmers’ position in the food supply chain and tackling unfair trading practices, 15508/16.Google Scholar
  10. Damjanovic, D. (2013). The EU market rules as social market rules: Why the EU can be a social market economy. Common Market Law Review, 50, 1685–1718.Google Scholar
  11. De Cristofaro, G. (2015). Unfair business-to-microenterprise commercial practices: The Italian solution in the European context – the extended scope of application of UCP Directive’s implementing provisions. Journal of European Consumer and Market Law, 5, 20–29.Google Scholar
  12. De Vrey, R. W. (2006). Towards a European unfair competition law. A clash between legal families. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. European Commission. (1977). Proposal for a Council directive relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading and unfair advertising COM(1977) 724 final.Google Scholar
  14. European Commission. (1983). Commission report: Assessment of the function of the internal market COM(83) 80 final.Google Scholar
  15. European Commission. (2001). Communication on sales promotion in the Internal Market COM(2001) 546 final.Google Scholar
  16. European Commission. (2002). Commission Communication: Consumer policy strategy 2002–2006 COM(2002) 208 final.Google Scholar
  17. European Commission. (2003). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the Internal Market and amending directives 84/450/EEC, 97/7/EC and 98/27/EC (the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive) COM(2003) 356 final.Google Scholar
  18. European Commission. (2004). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty concerning the common position of the Council on the adoption of a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the Internal Market and amending Regulation [Consumer Protection Co-operation] and directives 84/450/EEC, 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC (the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive) COM(2004) 753 final.Google Scholar
  19. European Commission. (2006). Green Paper on the review of the consumer acquis COM(2006) 744 final.Google Scholar
  20. European Commission. (2007). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the European Economic and Social Committee - EU Consumer Policy strategy 2007–2013 - Empowering consumers, enhancing their welfare, effectively protecting them COM(2007) 99 final.Google Scholar
  21. European Commission. (2008). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on consumer rights COM(2008) 614 final.Google Scholar
  22. European Commission. (2009). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - A better functioning food supply chain in Europe COM(2009) 591 final.Google Scholar
  23. European Commission. (2011). Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Common European Sales Law COM(2011) 635 final.Google Scholar
  24. European Commission. (2012). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Protecting businesses against misleading marketing practices and ensuring effective enforcement Review of Directive 2006/114/EC concerning misleading and comparative advertising COM(2012) 702 final.Google Scholar
  25. European Commission. (2013a). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure COM(2013) 813 final.Google Scholar
  26. European Commission. (2013b). Green Paper on unfair trading practices in the business-to-business food and non-food supply chain in Europe COM(2013) 37 final.Google Scholar
  27. European Commission. (2014a). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Tackling unfair trading practices in the business-to-business food supply chain COM(2014) 472 final.Google Scholar
  28. European Commission. (2014b). The Juncker Commission. The right team to deliver change. SPEECH-14-585.Google Scholar
  29. European Commission. (2016a). Guidance on the implementation/application of Directive 2005/29/EC on Unfair Commercial Practices SWD(2016) 163 final.Google Scholar
  30. European Commission. (2016b). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on unfair business-to-business trading practices in the food supply chain COM(2016) 32 final.Google Scholar
  31. European Commission. (2016c). An overview of European competition rules applying in the agricultural sector (DG Comp). Retrieved January 20, 2017, from https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/sites/agriculture/files/agri-markets-task-force/2016-06-28/memo.pdf
  32. European Commission. (2017a). Report of the Fitness Check on Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market SWD(2017) 209 final.Google Scholar
  33. European Commission. (2017b). Commission initiative to improve the governance of the food supply chain with regard to unfair trading practices, one rule regarding producer cooperation and market transparency, Ares(2017)3735471.Google Scholar
  34. European Commission. (2018a). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993, Directive 98/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards better enforcement and modernisation of EU consumer protection rules COM(2018) 185 final.Google Scholar
  35. European Commission. (2018b). Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships in the food supply chain COM(2018) 173 final.Google Scholar
  36. European Commission. (2018c). Commission staff working document: Impact assessment: Initiative to improve the food supply chain (unfair trading practices): Accompanying the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on unfair trading practices in business-to-business relationships in the food supply chain: Annex H prepared for the impact assessment. SWD(2018) 92 final.Google Scholar
  37. European Commission. (2018d). Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services COM(2018) 238 final.Google Scholar
  38. European Commission. (2018e). Commission staff working document: Impact assessment: Accompanying the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services. SWD(2018) 138 final.Google Scholar
  39. European Parliament. (2016). Motion for a European Parliament resolution on unfair trading practices in the food supply chain, 2015/2065/INI.Google Scholar
  40. Glöckner, J. (2007). The ECJ’s case law on unfair competition. In R. M. Hilty & F. Henning-Bodewig (Eds.), Law against unfair competition towards a new paradigm in Europe? (pp. 101–110). Berlin, New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Henning-Bodewig, F. (2007). Secondary unfair competition law. In R. M. Hilty & F. Henning-Bodewig (Eds.), Law against unfair competition towards a new paradigm in Europe? (pp. 111–125). Berlin, New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hilty, R. M. (2007). The law against unfair competition and its interfaces. In R. M. Hilty & F. Henning-Bodewig (Eds.), Law against unfair competition towards a new paradigm in Europe? (pp. 1–52). Berlin, New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jabłonowska, A. (2018). Status-related consumer protection in the digital economy. LLM Thesis. Retrieved June 20, 2018, from http://cadmus.eui.eu//handle/1814/50746
  44. Joerges, C. (2005). What is left of the European economic constitution? A melancholic eulogy. European Law Review, 30, 461–489.Google Scholar
  45. Joint Statement. (2016, April 29). Joint statement of the Ministers of Agriculture of the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Austria, Bulgaria, Romania and Slovenia on the Situation on Commodity Markets. Prague. Retrieved June 30, 2017, from https://www.minrol.gov.pl/content/download/56972/313420/version/1/file/Joint%20Statement%20of%20the%20Ministers%20of%20Agriculture%20V4+4.pdf
  46. Kaupa, C. (2016). The pluralist character of the European economic constitution. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  47. Keirsbilck, B. (2011). The new European law of unfair commercial practices and competition law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  48. Maduro, M. P. (1998). We the Court – The European Court of Justice and the European economic constitution. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  49. Micklitz, H.-W. (2009). The targeted full harmonisation approach: Looking behind the curtain. In G. Howells & R. Schulze (Eds.), Modernising and harmonising consumer contract law (pp. 47–86). Munich: Sellier.Google Scholar
  50. Micklitz, H.-W. (2016). The consumer: marketised, fragmentised, constitutionalised. In D. Leczykiewicz & S. Weatherill (Eds.), The images of the consumer in EU law: Legislation, free movement and competition law (pp. 21–41). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  51. Namysłowska, M., & Piszcz, A. (2017). Ustawa o przeciwdziałaniu nieuczciwemu wykorzystywaniu przewagi kontraktowej w obrocie produktami rolnymi i spożywczymi. Komentarz. Warsaw: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
  52. Podszun, R. (2013). Unfair trading practices: The Commission’s Green Paper for fairness in B2B-dealings. Zeitschrift für Europäisches Unternehmens- und Verbraucherrecht, 2, 42–44.Google Scholar
  53. REFIT Scoreboard. REFIT Scoreboard. Retrieved June 22, 2017, from http://publications.europa.eu/webpub/com/refit-scoreboard/en/images/REFIT_Scoreboard.pdf
  54. Reich, N. (2016). Vulnerable consumers in EU law. In D. Leczykiewicz & S. Weatherill (Eds.), The images of the consumer in EU law: Legislation, free movement and competition law (pp. 139–158). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  55. Report. Report on the outcome of public consultation of the Green paper on the review of consumer acquis. Retrieved March 15, 2017, from http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/archive/cons_int/safe_shop/acquis/acquis_working_doc.pdf
  56. Reynolds, S. (2016). Explaining the constitutional drivers behind a perceived judicial preference for free movement over fundamental rights. Common Market Law Review, 53, 643–678.Google Scholar
  57. Rutgers, J. W. (2009). The European economic constitution, freedom of contract and the DCFR. European Review of Contract Law, 5, 95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schmidt, S. K. (2008). Beyond compliance: The Europeanization of Member States through negative integration and legal uncertainty. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 10, 299–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Study. Study for the fitness check of EU consumer and marketing law (Final report Part 1 – Main report). Retrieved March 15, 2017, from https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/f7b3958b-772b-11e7-b2f2-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
  60. Stuyck, J. (2015). The Court of Justice and the unfair commercial practices directive. Common Market Law Review, 52, 721–752.Google Scholar
  61. Tonner, K. (2014). From the Kennedy message to full harmonising consumer law directives: A retrospect. In K. Purnhagen & P. Rott (Eds.), Varieties of European economic law and regulation: Liber Amicorum for Hans Micklitz (pp. 693–708). Berlin, New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  62. Ullrich, H. (2005). Anti-unfair competition law and anti-trust law: A continental conundrum? (EUI Working Paper LAW No. 2005/01).Google Scholar
  63. Ulmer, E. (1965). Das Recht des unlauteren Wettbewerbs in den Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft. München: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
  64. Van Duin, A. (2017). Metamorphosis? The role of Article 47 of the EU Charter of fundamental rights in cases concerning national remedies and procedures under Directive 93/13/EEC. Journal of European Consumer and Market Law, 6, 190–198.Google Scholar
  65. Weatherill, S. (2001). Justifying limits to party autonomy in the internal market – EC legislation in the field of consumer protection. In S. Grundmann, W. Kerber, & S. Weatherill (Eds.), Party autonomy and the role of information in the internal market (pp. 173–196). Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  66. Weatherill, S. (2012). The consumer rights directive: How and why a quest for “coherence” has (largely) failed. Common Market Law Review, 49, 1279–1317.Google Scholar
  67. Weatherill, S. (2016). The internal market as a legal concept. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Łódź, Faculty of Law and AdministrationŁódźPoland

Personalised recommendations