Council Directive 96/67/EC constitutes an important step toward the liberalization of groundhandling services at Community airports. However, the Authority felt that the above draft law is not fully consistent with EC Directive, given that it introduces ties to the liberalization of the groundhandling market which are not provided for by Directive and does not take up the criteria set out by the Council whereas in certain cases specific constraints could be such that they may justify restrictions on market access.

First, the draft law, referring to a provision contained in Law no. 351/95, establishes that the entry of newcomers into the groundhandling market be subject to the assessment of staffing levels of the airport and to the continuity of the relations with the employees hired by the previous employer.

Accordingly to its advisory opinion of June 22nd, 1995, on legislation concerning the airport sector, the Authority pointed out that imposing on new entrants the obligation to hire surplus labour could discourage access of newcomers and restrict competition. Nevertheless, it is possible that the opening-up of competition, through quality increase and service price reduction, could also lead to increase appreciably demand of services themselves.

Second, the draft law in question provides for restrictions on market access to a larger extent than those set out in EC Directive. Further, it omits to lay down a selection procedure for suppliers authorized to provide groundhandling services through an invitation to tender, where such restrictions are necessary.

The Authority deemed that legislator should define more clearly the cases where the number of authorized suppliers can be limited, in order to avoid introducing in Italian law obstacles to a full liberalization of the groundhandling market. In addition, the draft law in question should make explicit the principles which the selection procedure of suppliers must comply with, in cases where their number is limited, so as to transpose EC Directive accurately.

The Authority highlighted that the absence of the concept of self-handling and explicit references to standard conditions or technical specifications to be met by authorized suppliers could encourage a restrictive interpretation of the provisions of EC Directive and facilitate behaviours which are in contrast with competition principles. The Authority felt that the transposition of the Directive should lay down clearly the conditions in which airliners and their controlled firms can supply self-handling services.

Lastly, the Authority said that fees to be paid by new entrants to the managing body of the airport for the use of infrastructure should be relating to airport management and development costs and should not constitute royalties compensating for the cessation of earnings in consequence of the liberalization of services.