Procedural warranties: ECJ Advocate General Mengozzi invites the Court to precise the application of the procedural warranties regarding the use of procedural documents from a foreign procedure and suggests the invalidation of the General Court’s judgement in a cartel case (Archer Daniels Midland)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. In its submission of November 6, 2008, on the appeal brought by Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) in Case T-373/98 (Case T-376/98) of the CFI delivered on 27 September 2006 concerning the citric acid cartel, Advocate General Mengozzi proposes that the Court should uphold a certain number of means supported by ADM. First, it calls on the Court to set aside the judgment at issue in so far as it rejects the applicant's complaint concerning a breach of the rights of the defence for failure to state the facts in the statement of objections on which the Commission relied to find that it was the