CHRONIQUES : PROCEDURES – EUROPEAN UNION – STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS – HEARING

Rights of defense: Advocate General Whal proposes to the Court of Justice of the European Union to set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in the case of ‘concrete reinforcing bars’ on the ground that the European Commission did not follow the procedure laid down by the rules in force after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty (Feralpi Holding)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. In that case, the Commission had issued a decision penalising the applicants for their participation in a cartel in the reinforcing bar production sector. That decision, based on Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty and in accordance with the procedural rules specific to that provision, was nevertheless delivered on 17 December 2002, that is to say, after the expiry of the Treaty on 23 July 2002. The Court of First Instance then annulled that first decision, the reference to an incorrect procedural basis obliging it to find that the Commission was no longer competent to sanction the practice on the basis of the ECSC Treaty at the time when its decision was taken

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

Quotation

Alexandre Lacresse, Rights of defense: Advocate General Whal proposes to the Court of Justice of the European Union to set aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in the case of ‘concrete reinforcing bars’ on the ground that the European Commission did not follow the procedure laid down by the rules in force after the expiry of the ECSC Treaty (Feralpi Holding), 8 December 2016, Concurrences N° 1-2017, Art. N° 83525, pp. 184-185

Visites 141

All reviews