III. Competition

R. Lane
2001 International and Comparative Law Quarterly  
JANUARY 2000] Current Developments: EC Law 227 that a Joint Action on airport transit visas fell within the scope of Article 100c of the EC Treaty (as it then was), rather than Title VIEU, but the Court did rule that it had jurisdiction to consider the case. It found that Article M of the EU Treaty (now Article 47 EU, and not amended by the Amsterdam Treaty) gave it power to determine whether a third pillar measure should have been adopted in the first pillar, and to annul the measure if it
more » ... roached" upon an EC Treaty power. There may well be similar such disputes in future.'" Moreover, the boundary between Title IV EC and the "mainstream" EC Treaty may become highly contested, given the different roles of the institutions and different territorial scope of the two. In another case, the Court ruled that the Council's Decision on access to documents covered third pillar documents, and that moreover it had jurisdiction to rule on the application of the Decision to those documents. 40 Finally, the Court ruled on the validity of internal border controls maintained by member States, finding that Article 7a EC (now Article 14) lacked direct effect and that the right of EU citizens to "move and reside freely" did not preclude member States demanding to see their passports. 41 Tampere to discuss implementation further. It remains to be seen whether the Council will overcome the political deadlock which characterised much of the Maastricht-era third pillar, and whether post-Amsterdam JHA measures will take greater account of civil liberties, human rights and criminal justice principles than their predecessors. STEVE PEERS* III. COMPETITION A. Cartels The period under review (Spring 1998-Autumn 1999) is one in which the prohibition of cartels under Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty figured prominently, the Court of Justice clearing up a backlog of unfinished business relating back, in some cases, over a decade. The 1986 Polypropylene cartel decision 1 was finally put 39. The Commission has already argued that the proposed third pillar Decision on counterfeit travel documents (supra n.20) falls within the first pillar. 40. Case T-174/95 Svenska Joumatistforbundet [1998] E.CR. 11-2289. C. Conclusion The Amsterdam Treaty's creation of an area of "Freedom, Security and Justice" began with an early allocation of the Schengen acquis, a raft of proposed legislative measures, and a reorganisation of the EC institutions. The Council and Commission also agreed a very detailed Action Plan on implementing the new Area, 42 and a European Council was called for October 1999 in
doi:10.1093/iclq/50.3.702 fatcat:lrwspg3mxrg2jkrrh64wq7jqmu