Examples of using Regtp in English and their translations into Polish
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Financial
-
Official/political
-
Programming
-
Computer
Thus, RegTP finds in its decision of 29 April 2003 that.
That increase was authorised by RegTP by decision of 13 March 2002.
Next, RegTP examines the individual price adjustments proposed by the applicant.
The applicant's contribution to the infringement was slight because the charges at issue were set by RegTP.
Which are fixed by RegTP, ought to correspond to the cost of efficient service provision.
However, it must be held that, within that framework,the applicant was able to adjust its prices after obtaining the prior authorisation of RegTP.
Even if RegTP had infringed a Community rule and even if the Commission could have initiated proceedings.
In addition, it noted that the German legal framework did not preclude RegTP from authorising proposed charges which are contrary to Article 82 EC.
RegTP follows a similar reasoning in its decisions of 8 February 1999, 30 March 2001, 21 December 2001 and 11 April 2002.
On 15 January 2002, the applicant informed RegTP that it proposed to increase its monthly charges for analogue and ISDN lines by EUR 0.56.
It recalls that, under Community law, principal responsibility for telecommunications price-control is vested in the national authorities,such as RegTP.
In that context, RegTP checks whether the wholesale access charges proposed by the applicant satisfy the requirements laid down by Paragraph 24 of the TKG.
In addition, in its judgment of 16 January 2002,the Oberlandesgericht Düsseldorf held that responsibility for the charges set by RegTP could not be attributed to the applicant.
According to the telecommunications and post regulator(RegTP), total turnover in telecommunications services in Germany in 2002 was around EUR 61 billion.
RegTP has opted in its pricing policy for a slight rebalancing of connection charges and call charges decisions of RegTP of 21 December 2001 and of 11 April 2002.
A new price cap system was adopted by decision of RegTP of21 December 2001 and has been in effect since 1 January 2002 Amtsblatt(RegTP) 2/2002, of 6 February.
RegTP should therefore refuse a retail price adjustment sought by the applicant if the prices contravene Article 82 EC, particularly because of an anticompetitive margin squeeze.
However, that it did not have unlimited leeway because its charges had to be set on the basis of the cost ofefficient service provision and could be reviewed subsequently by RegTP.
The applicant observes that RegTP itself has concluded on several occasions since 1998 that there is no margin squeeze to the detriment of the applicant's competitors.
As a result, by decisions of 9 December 1997 and 23 December 1999 in price cap proceedings,the BMPT and then RegTP initially combined connection and call charges for businesses and for individuals in one basket.
RegTP closed the proceeding on 25 January 2002, having found that the price increase which the applicant had announced on 15 January 2002 did not give rise to a suspicion of price dumping.
However, in its decisions, after finding the negative spread between the applicant's wholesale and retail prices, RegTP took the view in each case that other operators should be able to offer their endusers competitive prices by resorting to cross-subsidisation of access services and call services see paragraphs 115 to 119 above.
The applicant submits that,by encroaching on the powers of RegTP, the Commission misused its powers and infringed the principles of proportionality, legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations.
Furthermore, as a result of the administrative practice of RegTP, which has considered the margin squeeze issue on many occasions, the applicant could assume that the Commission would ultimately reach the same conclusion as RegTP.