University of Leeds.
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2021 Jun 1;46(3):467-486. doi: 10.1215/03616878-8893557.
Since the 1990s, the EU's influence over national health care policy has been limited to European internal market law or social policy coordination mechanisms. The introduction of EU competition law into health care is more recent and underdeveloped; however, its introduction would potentially be much more far-reaching and disruptive.
Three EU competition law (state-aid) cases are used and comprise both Court of Justice and European Commission decisions. One is from Ireland, one is from the Netherlands, and the third is from Belgium.
The Belgian (Iris-H) case sees EU institutions scrutinize a clearly "social" (nonmarket) health care model with EU competition law for the first time. This is a highly significant development. It is clear, however, that the European Commission is more reluctant to use EU competition law to scrutinize health care systems than the European courts are.
This intent on the part of EU institutions will have to be assessed in future cases, as considerable uncertainty about its shape and outer contours remains. However, EU competition law, and the EU's state-aid investigation apparatus, encroaching into the national health care systems for the first time is highly significant.
自 20 世纪 90 年代以来，欧盟对国家医疗政策的影响仅限于欧洲内部市场法律或社会政策协调机制。将欧盟竞争法引入医疗保健领域是最近才出现的，且发展还不成熟；然而，其引入可能具有更深远和更具颠覆性的影响。
使用了三个欧盟竞争法（国家援助）案例，包括欧洲法院和欧盟委员会的决定。其中一个来自爱尔兰，一个来自荷兰，第三个来自比利时。
比利时（Iris-H）案是欧盟机构首次根据欧盟竞争法仔细审查一个明显的“社会”（非市场）医疗保健模式。这是一个非常重要的发展。然而，很明显，与欧洲法院相比，欧盟委员会更不愿意使用欧盟竞争法来审查医疗保健系统。
这是欧盟机构的意图，在未来的案件中需要进行评估，因为关于其形式和外部轮廓仍然存在相当大的不确定性。然而，欧盟竞争法以及欧盟的国家援助调查机构首次涉足国家医疗保健系统，这具有重大意义。
