Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2003:245
Date: 2003-09-30
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Competition;Agreements, decisions and concerted practices;Transport
Concepts: General;Direct effect, primacy and uniform application of the Community law;Matters covered;Definition of abuse;Examples of abuse;Determining the amount of the fine;Admissibility and examination of applications, forms of order sought and pleas in law;Rights of the defence and procedural guarantees;Competition rules;Decision of the Commission;Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations;Definition;Hearing of persons concerned and of third parties / Access to the file;Criteria for establishing the existence of a dominant position;Product or products constituting a market;Requests for information;Binding nature of the competition rules and measures taken by Member States, direct effect;Statement of the grounds on which judgments are based
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded;Action for annulment - successful
Origin: Germany;Denmark;United Kingdom;Poland;Sweden

Summary of the Order
1. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure — Interim
relief— Conditions for granting— Prima facie case— Urgency— Cumulative
requirements — Balancing of all the interests at stake
(EC Treaty, Arts 185 and 186 (now Arts 242 EC and 243 EC); Rules of Procedure of
the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2))
2. Applications for interim measures — Suspension of operation of a measure —
Suspension of operation of the obligation to lodge a bank guarantee as a condition
for postponing the immediate recovery of a fine — Conditions for granting —
Exceptional circumstances — Situation of the group to which the undertaking belongs
to be taken into account
(EC Treaty, Arts 185 and 186 (now Arts 242 EC and 243 EC); Rules of Procedure of
the Court of First Instance, Art. 104(2))
II - 2531
SUMMARY — CASE T-191/98 R
1. Article 104(2) of the Rules of Proce­
dure of the Court of First Instance
provides that applications for interim
measures must state the circumstances
giving rise to urgency and the pleas of
fact and law establishing a prima facie
case for the measures applied for.
Those requirements are cumulative, so
that an application for suspension of
operation must be dismissed if one of
them is not met. Where necessary, the
court hearing an application for
interim relief also balances the interests
at stake.
2. An application for suspension of opera­
tion of a measure, the object of which
is to obtain dispensation from the
obligation to provide a bank guarantee
as a condition for a fine not being
recovered immediately, may be granted
only in exceptional circumstances.
In order to assess the applicant's ability
to provide a bank guarantee without
jeopardising its existence, account
should also be taken of the group of
undertakings to which it belongs
directly or indirectly, particularly with
regard to the possibility of providing
the security which the banks might
require.
II - 2532