Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

The Role of the BUPA Judgement in the Legal Framework for Services of General Economic Interest

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites

image of Tilburg Law Review

The article analyses the BUPA judgment and the considerable changes that it has brought to the interpretation and application of the four Altmark criteria to services of general economic interest. By making the criteria more flexible, the General Court has put in question the definition of the basic features of those services, e.g. universal coverage. As a result, it would be easier for a service to be considered as a service of general economic interest, which in turn may undermine the effectiveness of the Services Directive. In addition, it is argued that there is value added in the adoption of a framework directive for services of general economic interest in order to mitigate the resulting legal uncertainty and to establish broad principles and conditions for the provision of services of general economic interest.


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation