CASE COMMENTS : PROCEDURES – ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES – FINES – BANK GARANTEE – APPLICATION FOR INTERIM MEASURES – HEAVY INDUSTRY

Fines – Bank garantee: The Court of Justice confirms that the application for interim measures must contain precise and full information regarding the situation of the appelant itself and of its shareholders (Fapricela)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. CJEU (Pres. Order), 20 April 2012, Fapricela v. Commission, Case C-507/11 P(R) In July 2010, the Commission imposed a fine of almost €9 million on Fapricela, penalising its participation in a cartel in the prestressing steel sector. Fapricela then brought an action for annulment before the Court of First Instance and, having been unable to provide a bank guarantee, requested the President of the Court of First Instance to order a stay of execution of the Commission's decision with regard to payment of the fine. This request was denied (Trib. EU (Pres. Order), 15 July 2011, Case T-398/10 R ; Concurrences No. 4-2011, this column, p. 173). The President of

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, Fines – Bank garantee: The Court of Justice confirms that the application for interim measures must contain precise and full information regarding the situation of the appelant itself and of its shareholders (Fapricela), 20 April 2012, Concurrences N° 3-2012, Art. N° 48448, pp. 185-186

Visites 185

All reviews