1.2.2016   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/23

1.

Do the contested legislation and the consequential implementing measures infringe the rules according to which the functions of regulating the television market are vested in an independent administrative authority (Articles 3 and 8 of Directive 2002/21/EC, (1)‘the Framework Directive’, as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC (2));

2.

Do the contested legislation and the consequential implementing measures infringe the provisions (Article 7 of Directive 2002/20/EC, (3)‘the Authorisation Directive’, and Article 6 of Directive 2002/21/EC, the Framework Directive) which provide for prior public consultation by the national independent authority regulating the sector;

3.

Does EU law, and in particular Article 56 TFEU, Article 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC, the Framework Directive, Articles 3, 5 and 7 of Directive 2002/20/EC, the Authorisation Directive, and Articles 2 and 4 of Directive 2002/77/EC, (4)‘the Competition Directive’, and the principles of non-discrimination, transparency, freedom of competition, proportionality, effectiveness and pluralism of information, preclude annulment of the beauty contest procedure — which was commenced in order to remedy, within the system for the allocation of digital television frequencies, the unlawful exclusion of operators from the market and to allow access for small operators — and substitution for it of another payment-based tendering procedure, which provides for the imposition on participants of requirements and obligations not previously required of incumbents, rendering engagement in competitive bidding onerous and uneconomic;

4.

Does EU law, in particular Article 56 TFEU, Article 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC, the Framework Directive, Articles 3, 5 and 7 of Directive 2002/20/EC, the Authorisation Directive, Articles 2 and 4 of Directive 2002/77/EC, the Competition Directive, and Article 258 TFEU, and the principles of non-discrimination, transparency, freedom of competition, proportionality, effectiveness and pluralism of information, preclude the re-configuration of the Plan for the allocation of frequencies, reducing national networks from 25 to 22 (and retention of the same availability of multiplexes for the incumbents), the reduction of lots in the competition to 3 multiplexes, the allocation of frequencies in the VHF-III band involving the risk of severe interference;

5.

Is the upholding of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations, as expounded by the Court of Justice, compatible with the annulment of the beauty contest procedure which has not allowed the appellants, already admitted to the free procedure, to be sure of being awarded some of the lots put out to tender;

6.

Is the enactment of a provision, such as that contained in Article 3 quinquies of Legislative Decree No 16 of 2012, which is out of harmony with the characteristics of the radio and television market, compatible with EU legislation on the allocation of user rights for frequencies (Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 2002/21/EC, the Framework Directive, Articles 5 and 7 of Directive 2002/20/EC, the Authorisation Directive, Articles 2 and 4 of Directive 2002/77/EC, the Competition Directive).