CASE COMMENTS: PROCEDURES – EUROPEAN UNION – STATE AIDS – TAX RULING – INTERVENTION OF A THIRD COUNTRY

Intervention of a third country: The General Court of the European Union rejects the application to intervene of a third country due to lack of direct interest in the result of the case (Apple)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. The concept of amicus curiae is not very popular in the Union's courts. While Article 15(3) of Regulation 1/2003 confers on the Commission this function of "friend of the court" before national courts (see judgment of the Court of Justice of 11 June 2009, X, case C-429/07, Case C-429/07, p. 1), the Commission has a duty to act as "amicus curiae" before national courts.), those of the Union do not seem to have any friends or, more precisely, do not particularly wish to have any. There are no procedural rules allowing a third party to join the proceedings without becoming a party to the proceedings and participating in the judicial debate. Intervention,

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

Pascal Cardonnel, Intervention of a third country: The General Court of the European Union rejects the application to intervene of a third country due to lack of direct interest in the result of the case (Apple), 15 December 2017, Concurrences N° 2-2018, Art. N° 86986

Visites 180

All reviews