Niet-horizontale concentratie ambulancedienst en ziekenhuis; geen beperking mededinging; geen marktafscherming; geen mogelijkheid en geen prikkel om toestroom van patiënten naar concurrerende ziekenhuizen te beïnvloeden; totale effect op daadwerkelijke mededinging voor concurrenten vermoedelijk gering: beroep ongegrond.

In March 2009 the Dutch Supreme Court reconfirmed that insulting a religion is in itself not a criminal offense equal to discrimination of, or incitement of hatred vis-a-vis the adherents of that religion. Interestingly, two months earlier, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal in the case against the parliamentarian Geert Wilders, ruled that insulting a religion may very well constitute an insult of its believers. This article is an analysis of the Amsterdam ruling and a discussion of the argument in favor and against the equation of insulting religion with insulting believers, based on the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.