Insights & news

Van Bael & Bellis successfully represents cable operators Nethys and Brutélé in proceedings against regulated wholesale tariffs for access to cable networks

  • 06/11/2017
  • News

On 25 October 2017, in four separate judgments, the Brussels Court of Appeal annulled two sets of decisions adopted in 2013 and 2016 by the Belgian telecommunications regulators. These decisions determine the wholesale tariffs applicable to the access to, and use of, cable operators’ networks by their competitors, such as Orange Belgium.

The four judgments are significant as they annul with retroactive effect all of the tariff rules imposed by the telecommunications regulators following the opening of the cable networks in Belgium in 2011.

More specifically, the Court found that the 2013 decisions lacked adequate reasons as the Belgian regulators had ignored the European Commission’s opinion on the draft decisions without explaining why they chose not to follow it. The Court also found fault with the regulators’ approach to consider Nethys and Brutélé as a single cable operator. Finally, the Court held that the 2016 decisions were also invalid as they relied on the annulled decisions of 2013 and were, in addition, based on an outdated analysis of the broadcasting market in breach of EU telecommunications law.

Van Bael & Bellis partner Peter L’Ecluse and associates Valérie Lefever, Eléonore Waterkeyn and Quentin Declève represented cable operators Nethys and Brutélé.

Key contacts

Related practice areas

Related insights

Sign up for updates
    • 21/01/2020
    • Newsletters

    VBB on Belgian Business Law, Volume 2019, No. 12

    The December 2019 issue of our Belgian Business Law newsletter reporting on the latest developments in a range of areas, including competition, data protection, intellectual property and labour law.

    Read more
    • 14/01/2020
    • Articles

    Advocate General Confirms Validity of EU Standard Contractual Clauses

    Advocate General Henrik Saugmandsgaard Øe recently delivered his opinion in the Facebook Ireland and Schrems case, (also known as the Schrems II case). The Advocate General states that the validity of the Commission Decision approving standard contractual clauses for the transfer of personal data (SCCs) cannot be called into question. At the same time, the Advocate General indicated that controllers and supervisory authorities have an obligation to suspend transfers on the basis of SCCs if the obligations contained in the clauses cannot be guaranteed under the laws of the data importer. Please click below for a short client memorandum on these guidelines.

    Read more
    • 14/01/2020
    • Articles

    OECD Makes Recommendations for Improvement of Performance-Based Managed Entry Agreements for Medicines

    The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) published a health working paper (the “Paper”) authored by Martin Wenzl and Suzannah Chapman that offers recommendations for the use of performance-based managed entry agreements in OECD countries and EU Member States (see, attached). The Paper reflects the results of a review of managed entry agreements (“MEAs”) carried out in 2018 and 2019. MEAs are arrangements between healthcare payers and pharmaceutical firms that provide for the reimbursement of generally new health technologies, including medicines, while controlling the financial impact of that reimbursement and keeping price concessions confidential. These financial agreements are thus tools for achieving patient access to medicines while managing uncertainty. A further group of MEA’s, far less common than these purely financial agreements, are performance-based contracts. Both financial MEA’s and performance-based MEA’s can be assessed either at the level of individual patients or at that of a given population. The Paper indicates that the experience with performance-based MEA’s is both limited and mixed. This is in large part due to the dearth of available information as few countries have formally assessed their experience with performance-based MEA’s. The Paper therefore relies on limited public sources and a number of expert interviews. Only Belgium and Sweden had independent evaluations conducted by third parties. The tentative conclusion of the Paper is that performance-based MEA’s have made only a limited contribution towards reducing uncertainty regarding product performance. This is why the Paper makes recommendations for good practices that make it more likely for performance-based MEA’s to reach their objectives. These are: i. to use performance-based MEA’s strategically and in the wider context of information derived from the use of other instruments such as horizon-scanning; ii. to identify uncertainties and design the performance-based MEA’s to address such uncertainties; iii. to create a governance framework that ensures transparency of process and guarantees that results are actually acted upon; iv. to ensure an appropriate level of transparency of content, even though some parts of the MEA’s, such as prices, may have to remain confidential. The Paper points out that countries could benefit from sharing information but very little information is at present published or shared. Still, the Paper cites approvingly a number of collaborative initiatives of the European Medicines Agency such as the EU-wide framework on patient registries or the European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance.

    Read more

Subscribe to our updates

Please select the practice areas you are interested in: *