Som den foreliggende sag så tydeligt viser, var ELPA’s blotte passivitet tilstrækkelig til i 2000 at forpurre en anden udbyders — her: MOTOE’s — forehavende.
As the present case clearly shows, the mere fact that ELPA omitted to act was sufficient to thwart the plans of another service provider — in this instance, MOTOE — in the year 2000.