CASE COMMENT : PROCEDURE - ANTICOMPETITIVE PRACTICES – INSPECTION DECISIONS – ABSENCE OF COURT WARRANT

Anticompetitive practices: The General Court holds that fundamental rights do not require the Commission to obtain a court warrant before ordering an inspection (Deutsche Bahn)

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. After the judgments of 14 November 2012 in cases Nexans v Commission and Prysmian v Commission (T-135/09 and T-140/09, see this Chronicle), the Tribunal has supplemented its jurisprudence on inspection operations in a case concerning rail transport. In 2011, the Commission investigated certain unilateral practices of the Deutsche Bahn (DB) group. On the basis of decisions taken under Article 20(4) of Regulation 1/2003, the Commission carried out three successive raids on the premises of this company. The first was justified by suspicions of unilateral practices concerning the supply of electrical power for rail traction ("EET"). This particularly

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, Anticompetitive practices: The General Court holds that fundamental rights do not require the Commission to obtain a court warrant before ordering an inspection (Deutsche Bahn), 6 September 2013, Concurrences N° 4-2013, Art. N° 59364, p. 142

Visites 198

All reviews