magistrska naloga
Staša Ana Kanduč (Avtor), Rajko Knez (Mentor), Martina Repas (Komentor)

Povzetek

Ideja o zagotavljanju poštenosti v vseh odnosih na trgu (odnosih med konkurenti, odnosih med podjetji in potrošniki ter v vertikalnih odnosih med samimi podjetji) v pravu EU ni celovito izpeljana. Približana so le določena vprašanja s področja prava preprečevanja nelojalne konkurence in sicer deloma s primarnim pravom (pravila, ki jih je oblikovalo Sodišče EU v zvezi s prostim pretokom blaga in storitev), deloma pa s sekundarnim pravom (direktive). Temeljni motiv evropskega zakonodajalca pri pripravi sekundarnih pravil s področja preprečevanja nelojalne konkurence je zaenkrat varstvo potrošnikov, osrednje merilo za presojanje dejanj nelojalne konkurence pa vpliv na njihove interese. Vertikalen pristop, ki je dolgo časa prevladoval pri sprejemanju pravil na tem področju, je privedel do razdrobljenosti zakonodajnega okolja, ki je Direktiva o nepoštenih poslovnih praksah podjetij v razmerju do potrošnikov na notranjem trgu (v nadaljevanju DNPP), kljub bolj horizontalnemu pristopu, ni odpravila, temveč mestoma le še poglobila. Povzročila je namreč delitev (v mnogih državah enotnega) sistema varstva pred nelojalno konkurenco na pravila, ki so določena v korist potrošnikov in pravila, ki so določena v korist (poštenih) konkurentov. Pravila za preprečevanje nepoštenih poslovnih praks, ki škodijo ekonomskim interesom potrošnikov, so tako sedaj deloma popolnoma usklajena (splošni vidiki), deloma pa podvržena minimalni harmonizaciji (posebni vidiki). Varstvo pred nepoštenimi poslovnimi praksami v odnosih B2B pa se (bolj ali manj vzporedno) zagotavlja na tri različne načine: neposredno (Direktiva o zavajajočem in primerjalnem oglaševanju določa minimalne standarde za varstvo pred zavajajočim oglaševanjem in na principu maksimalne harmonizacije temelječe kriterije za primerjalno oglaševanje), posredno (preko zaščite ekonomskih interesov potrošnikov s prepovedjo nepoštenih poslovnih praks v odnosih B2C) in z neusklajeno nacionalno zakonodajo (npr. suženjsko posnemanje, varovanje poslovne skrivnosti, očrnitev konkurentov…). Analiza določb DNPP in prvih sodb Sodišča EU o njeni razlagi je potrdila predvidevanje o vplivu določb DNPP na odnose B2B. Pri večini nepoštenih poslovnih praks je namreč interes potrošnikov in konkurentov za njihovo prepoved neločljivo povezan. Potrošnik, ki bo s tožbo (ali predlogom pristojnemu upravnemu organu za uvedbo postopka) v svojem (ekonomskem) interesu dosegel prepoved določene nepoštene poslovne prakse, bo poleg sebe (in ostalih potrošnikov) pogosto posredno zavaroval tudi ekonomske interese konkurentov. Poleg tega morajo biti po členu 11 DNPP tudi samim konkurentom (ki imajo po nacionalnem pravu upravičen interes za boj proti nepoštenim poslovnim praksam) zagotovljena učinkovita sredstva za boj proti nepoštenim poslovnim praksam. To pomeni, da podjetja za varovanje (samo) svojih interesov nimajo nobenih sredstev, imajo pa jih zaradi varovanja ekonomskih interesov potrošnikov. Pričakovati je, da bodo pod njimi lahko v marsikaterem primeru skrila tudi svoje interese in jih tako (posredno) zaščitila.

Ključne besede

konkurenčno pravo;nelojalna konkurenca;potrošniki;Evropska unija;magistrske naloge;

Podatki

Jezik: Slovenski jezik
Leto izida:
Izvor: Maribor
Tipologija: 2.09 - Magistrsko delo
Organizacija: UM PF - Pravna fakulteta
Založnik: [S.A. Kanduč Valant]
UDK: 339.923:061.1EU(043.2)
COBISS: 4187691 Povezava se bo odprla v novem oknu
Št. ogledov: 3536
Št. prenosov: 573
Ocena: 0 (0 glasov)
Metapodatki: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Ostali podatki

Sekundarni jezik: Angleški jezik
Sekundarni naslov: PROTECTION OF COMPETITORS UNDER EU RULES ON UNFAIR COMMERCIAL PRACTICES
Sekundarni povzetek: The idea of ensuring fairness in all market relations (relations between competitors, relations between business and customers and in vertical relations between businesses) has not been implemented in EU legislation in an integrated manner. Only certain aspects have been approximated in the field of law against unfair competition, in part by primary law (via the judicial practice of ECJ of the freedom of goods and services), and in part by secondary law (directives). The main motive of the European legislators when compiling secondary rules in the field of unfair competition is protection of consumers, while the central criterion are the effects on their interests. The vertical approach that was long prevalent in adopting rules in this field led to a fragmented regulatory environment, which the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD), despite its more horizontal approach, did not remedy, but actually made worse in some aspects. Namely, it caused the division of the national laws on unfair competition (which used to be unified in most countries) into those providing protection to consumers and those providing protection to (fair) competitors. The rules for preventing unfair commercial practices that harm the economic interests of consumers are now partially fully harmonized (in respect to common features) and partially subject to minimal harmonization (special aspects). On the other hand, protection against unfair commercial practices in B2B relations is (more or less in parallel) provided in three ways: directly (the Directive on Misleading and Comparative Advertising sets minimum standards for protection against misleading advertising and criteria for comparative advertising based on the principle of maximum harmonization), indirectly (through protection of economic interests of consumers by prohibiting unfair business practices in B2C relations) and with unharmonized national legislation (e.g. slavish imitation, protection of trade secrets, discrediting competition etc.). The analysis of provisions of UCPD and the first ECJ decisions on its interpretation confirmed the predictions about the effects the has on B2B relations. In most unfair commercial practices, the interests of consumers and competitors for prohibition of such practices are intertwined. The consumer who, due to their own (financial) interest, takes legal action (or brings unfair commercial practices before an administrative authority), which causes the unfair commercial practice to be banned, will in addition to benefiting themselves (and other consumers) also indirectly protect the economic interests of the competitors. Furthermore, according to Article 11 of UCPD, the competitors themselves (who, under national law, have a legitimate interest in combating unfair commercial practices) must be provided with effective means of fighting such unfair commercial practices. This means that the traders have no means to protect only their own interests, but have the means to protect the economic interests of consumers. It is therefore to be expected that in many cases, they will disguise their own interests in such a manner and thereby (indirectly) protect them.
Sekundarne ključne besede: unfair competition;law against unfair competition;protection of competitors;unfair commercial practices;misleading advertising;comparative advertising;
URN: URN:SI:UM:
Vrsta dela (COBISS): Magistrsko delo
Komentar na gradivo: Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fakulteta
Strani: 143 f.
Ključne besede (UDK): social sciences;družbene vede;economics;economic science;ekonomija;ekonomske vede;trade;commerce;international economic relations;world economy;trgovina;tržišče;marketing;international economy generally;international economic relations;global economy;mednarodno gospodarstvo;mednarodni gospodarski odnosi;svetovno gospodarstvo;science and knowledge;organization;computer science;information;documentation;librarianship;institutions;publications;znanost in znanje;organizacije;informacije;dokumentacija;bibliotekarstvo;institucije;publikacije;organizations of a general nature;korporacije na splošno;organizations and other types of cooperation;organizacije in druge oblike sodelovanja;governmental organizations and cooperation;vladne organizacije in sodelovanje;
ID: 1013662