ALERT: PROCEDURE - ABUSE OF DOMINANT POSITION - INSPECTIONS - CONSEQUENCES OF ILLEGAL SEARCHES MADE BY THE COMMISSION - RIGHTS OF DEFENCE

Search and seizure : The Court of Justice of the European Union sets aside the judgement of the General Court in the case of the incumbent German railway company, holding that subsequent inspections by the Commission were based on a first inspection that was vitiated by irregularity since the Commission’s agents, being previously in possession of information unrelated to the subject-matter of that inspection, proceeded to seize documents falling outside the scope of the inspection as circumscribed by the first contested decision (Deutsche Bahn)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. CJEU, 18 June 2015, Case C-583/13 (Deutsche Bahn) Fully in line with the conclusions presented on 12 February 2015 by Advocate General Nils Wahl in Case C-583/13 (Deutsche Bahn AG and Others v. Commission), the Court of Justice of the European Union has given a particularly welcome judgment in Case C-583/13 (Deutsche Bahn AG and Others v. Commission) on 18 June 2015.The Court of First Instance's Judgment of 6 September 2013 validating a practice of "incidental" Commission inspections, but also the second and third inspection decisions adopted by the Commission in this case, in so far as those "incidental" Commission inspections were based on an initial

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

  • L’actu-concurrence (Paris)

Quotation

Alain Ronzano, Search and seizure : The Court of Justice of the European Union sets aside the judgement of the General Court in the case of the incumbent German railway company, holding that subsequent inspections by the Commission were based on a first inspection that was vitiated by irregularity since the Commission’s agents, being previously in possession of information unrelated to the subject-matter of that inspection, proceeded to seize documents falling outside the scope of the inspection as circumscribed by the first contested decision (Deutsche Bahn), 18 June 2015, Concurrences N° 3-2015, Art. N° 75362, www.concurrences.com

Visites 323

All reviews