CASE COMMENT: COLLUSIVE PRACTICES - ARTICLES 10 AND 81 EC - NATIONAL RULES - RULES SETTING ITALIAN LAWYERS’ FEES

Lawyers’ fees: The ECJ confirms and further specifies its Arduino case law according to which Articles 10 EC and 81 EC combined do not cover national rules setting professional scales of charges (Frederico Cipolla)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. ECJ, 6 December 2006, Frederico Cipolla v. Rosaria Portolese; Stefano Macrino and Claudia Capodarte v. Roberto Meloni, Joined Cases C-94/04 and C-202/04 Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by the Corte d'appello di Torino (Italy) and the Tribunal di Roma (Italy) for a preliminary ruling on two questions referred to it by the Corte d'appello di Torino (Italy) and the Tribunal di Roma (Italy) for a preliminary ruling on the compatibility of Italian legislation on the fixing of fees for Italian lawyers. The examination of these national provisions concerned both EC Treaty rules on free competition and those on the

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.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • European Court of Justice (Luxembourg)

Quotation

Cyril Sarrazin, Lawyers’ fees: The ECJ confirms and further specifies its Arduino case law according to which Articles 10 EC and 81 EC combined do not cover national rules setting professional scales of charges (Frederico Cipolla), 6 December 2006, Concurrences N° 1-2007, Art. N° 12803, p. 89

Visites 5316

All reviews