The EU Court of Justice holds that a concerted practice can have the object of restricting competition even in the absence of an anti-competitive effect on the market (Hüls)

Case C-199/92 P Hüls AG v Commission of the European Communities * 1. The fact that the Court has, by a previous order, given a person leave to intervene in support of the form of order sought by a party does not preclude a fresh examination of the admissibility of the intervention. 2. Pursuant to Articles 168a of the Treaty (now Article 225 EC) and the first paragraph of Article 51 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, an appeal may rely only on grounds relating to the infringement of rules of law, to the exclusion of any appraisal of the facts. The appraisal by the Court of First Instance of the evidence put before it does not constitute, save where the clear sense of that evidence has been distorted, a point of law which is subject, as such, to review by the Court of Justice.

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.