natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Efter uanmeldte kontrolundersøgelser i 1989 hos de største sodaproducenter inden for Fællesskabet og efterfølgende begæringer om oplysninger fremsendte Kommissionen sagsøgeren en meddelelse af klagepunkter, opdelt i flere grupper, herunder bl.a. overtrædelse af EØF-traktatens artikel 86.
Annulled Commission Decision 91/299/EEC of 19 December 1990 relating to a proceeding under Article 86 of the EEC Treaty (¡V/33.133-C: Soda-ash - Solvay);
Påstanden om annullation af beslutningen
Ordered the Commission to pay the costs.'
Kommissionen anmodede sagsøgeren om at deltage i en høring. Sagsøgeren afviste denne anmodning.
Case T-36/91 Imperial Chemical Industries pic ν Commission of the European Communities Competition
Med hensyn til andet led i anbringendet bemærkes, at ifølge Kommissionens svar på et af Retten stillet skriftligt spørgsmål indgik punkt 63 i teksten til det beslutningsudkast, som den samlede Kommission godkendte.
(Competition — Concerted practice —Presumption of innocence — Administrative procedure - Rights of the defence — Equality of arms — Access to the file) (First Chamber, extended composition)
Efter afslutningen af den ovenfor beskrevne procedure vedtog Kommissionen beslutning 91/299/EØF.
Administrative procedure
Følgelig pålægges der ved beslutningen sagsøgeren en bøde på 20 mio. ECU.
At the beginning of 1989 the Commission carried out investigations without warning at the
eventuelt offentliggøres i De Europæiske Fællesskabers Tidende.
were not offered in evidence.
Stadfæstelsen af en beslutning skal derfor nødvendigvis ligge forud for dens meddelelse.
In it the applicant protested against the refusal to grant access to the file and annexed several new documents as evidence.
Det er tænkeligt, at punktet er faldet ud under denne ombrydning.
That information was supplied by the applicant in a letter, in which it pointed out the confidential nature of the documents sent.
Denne rækkefølge, der følger af en systematisk fortolkning med udgangspunkt i ordlyden, understøttes af formålet med bestemmelsen om stadfæstelse.
The Commission held a hearing concerning the infringements alleged against the applicant and Solvay.
Stadfæstelsen udgør således en væsentlig formforskrift.
Only the applicant took part in it.
Denne forklaring understøttes af den stadlæstclscsformular, der senere er påført teksten til beslutningen, ifølge hvilken »den vedlagte betragtning 63 er blevet vedtaget af Kommissionen under dens 1040. møde ...«.
The Commission stated that 'passages which may possibly relate to secret or confidential matters and which do not relate directly to the suspected infringement have been deleted from the documents'.
Selv om denne stadfæstelse ikke har fundet sted i overensstemmelse med Kommissionens forretningsorden, finder Retten, at den kan anses for et beviselement, som fastslår, at den samlede Kommission rent faktisk har vedtaget punkt 63.
Finally, the Commission revealed to each undertaking the replies given by the other undertaking and stated that 'information which might be commercially sensitive has [again] been blanked out'.
I denne sag har stadfæstelsen af den omhandlede beslutning fundet sted, efter at beslutningen var blevet meddelt.
In a telephone call made on 14 May 1990 the applicant's lawyer requested access to the Commission's file in so far as it related to the infringements alleged against the applicant.
Følgelig er en væsentlig formforskrift overtrådt.
That request was apparently rejected by Mr J, an official in DG IV of the Commission.
Det bemærkes følgelig, at punkt 63, skønt vedtaget af Kommissionen, ikke var blevet meddelt sagsøgeren før sagens anlæg.
According to the department concerned, the Commission had not used them against Solvay because they were confidential.
Imidlertid kan det ikke i sig selv medføre beslutningens annullation, at meddelelsen var behæftet med en sådan mangel, men alene føre til, at det ikkemeddelte punkt ikke kan gøres gældende.
It had nevertheless decided to introduce them at that stage of the procedure not because they contained additional evidence compared with the documents annexed to the statement of objections, but in order to reply to the applicant's argument based on the alleged lack of documentary evidence.
Det andet led i anbringendet tages derfor ikke til følge.
The problem should not therefore be discussed at the hearing.
Denne er således uafhængig af spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt de vedtagne, meddelte og offentliggjorte tekster indeholder uoverensstemmelser, og i bekræftende fald hvorvidt de sidstnævnte er afgørende, hvorfor det er uden betydning, at de forskelle i ordlyden, som sagsøgeren har påpeget — henholdsvis »for Kommissionen« og »på Kommissionens vegne« og det manglende punkt 63 — må betragtes som værende uvæsentlige.
By letter of 23 May 1990, the applicant's lawyer repeated his request and referred to the reaction of Mr J who, he claimed, had refused to grant him any access to the file, even to documents which were not confidential. According to the lawyer, there had also been a refusal to provide a list of documents in the file.
Uafhængigt af de ovenfor fremsatte betragtninger bemærkes, at stadfæstelsen i dette tilfælde er sket efter sagens anlæg.
At the end of the abovementioned procedure the Commission adopted Decision 91/297/EEC.
Det fremgår heraf, at det første led i anbringendet om den ikke-forskriftsmæssige stadfæstelse af den af Kommissionen vedtagne beslutning må tages til følge.
The decision contested by the present action was notified to the applicant by registered letter.
Beslutningen annulleres derfor i sin helhed, uden at det findes fornødent at tage stilling til de andre af sagsøgeren fremførte anbringender til støtte for annullationspåstanden.
It is common ground that the text of the notified decision had not been previously authenticated by the signatures of the President of the Commission or its Executive Secretary in accordance with the Commission's Rules of Procedure.
anbringendet vedrørende manglende stadfæstelse forud for meddelelsen ethvert grundlag.
The claim for annulment of the decision
Retten finder endnu engang, at et sådant resultat ville stride mod retssikkerheden og hensynet til de retsundcrgivnc, der ved beslutning pålægges en sanktion.
Infringement of the rights of the defence through refusal to grant access to the Commission's file a review solely in relation to the pleas raised and which cannot therefore be a substitute for a thorough investigation of the case in the course of the administrative procedure.
Følgelig har den stadfæstelse, som skete et år efter sagens anlæg, ikke ophævet den mangel, der skyldes overtrædelsen af en væsentlig formforskrift.
The Court cannot therefore rule out the possibility that the Commission would have found the infringement to be shorter and less serious and would, consequently, have fixed the fine at a lower amount.
Kommissionens beslutning 91/299/EØF af 19. december 1990 om en procedure i henhold til EØF-traktatens artikel 86 (W/33.133-C: Soda - Solvay) annulleres.
However, respect for the rights of the defence should not be allowed to conflict with technical and legal difficulties which an efficient administration can and must overcome.
»Konkurrence — samordnet praksis — forhåndsformodning om manglende skyld administrativ procedure — ret til kontradiktion — ligestilling af parterne — aktindsigt* (Første Udvidede Afdeling)
Accordingly, since it failed, when notifying the statement of objections, to disclose the documents marked 'IV', either in the form of appendices or in the form of a list, the Commission infringed the applicant's rights of defence.
Den administrative procedure med de ønskede oplysninger og fremhævede atter, at de fremsendte dokumenter var fortrolige.
It should be repeated that a defect affecting the administrative procedure cannot be regularized during the proceedings before the Court, in which judicial review is performed only in relation to the pleas raised and which cannot therefore be a substitute for a full investigation of the case by way of an administrative proceeding.
Solvay har ligeledes i anledning af samme kontrolundersøgelser og begæringer om oplysninger understreget sine dokumenters fortrolige karakter.
If the applicant had discovered, by means of an appropriate list, documents of Solvay exculpating the two undertakings, it might have been able, during the administrative procedure, to influence the assessments made by the Commission.
Kommissionen fremsendte dernæst sagsøgeren en meddelelse af klagepunkter.
The second part of the plea should therefore be upheld.
I begyndelsen af 1989 foretog Kommissionen uanmeldte kontrolundersøgelser hos de vigtigste sodaproducenter i EF. Efter disse kontrolundersøgelser henledte sagsøgeren Kommissionens opmærksomhed på, at de hos selskabet fundne dokumenter alle var fortrolige. Kommissionen svarede, at den ikke ville undlade at tage hensyn til de omhandlede dokumenters fortrolige karakter, og at virkelige forretningshemmeligheder ikke ville blive røbet.
Moreover, any infringement of the rights of the defence which occurred during the administrative procedure cannot be regularized during the proceedings before the Court, which carries out
Kommissionen angav, at »de dele, som kunne udgøre forretningshemmeligheder, eller som er ømtålelige set fra et forretningsmæssigt synspunkt, og som ikke direkte vedrører den påståede overtrædelse [er blevet] udeladt«.
As regards the third part of the plea, concerning the nondisclosure so the applicant of documents produced by other Community soda-ash
Endelig har Kommissionen fremsendt hver virksomhed de svar, den anden har givet, og præciseret, at »de oplysninger, der kan udgøre forretningshemmeligheder [ligeledes er] udeladt af disse besvarelser«.
and since the economic context in which such an independent decision was made is capable of being applied to Solvay, the possibility that such documents exist must suffice for a finding that the rights of the defence were infringed.
Ved denne lejlighed fremlagde sagsøgeren et nyt indlæg, »sagsfremstillingen«, hvortil yderligere dokumenter var vedføjet.
It follows that a third infringement of the rights of the defence has been proved.
Den 14. maj 1990 anmodede sagsøgerens advokat telefonisk om adgang til Kommissionens sagsakter i det omfang, de vedrørte overtrædelser, der skulle være begået af sagsøgeren.
producers, it follows from the considerations relating to the first and second parts of the plea that, in the specific circumstances of the present case, the Commission ought also to have drawn up a list of documents contained in the 'files' of the other producers.
Denne anmodning er øjensynligt blevet afvist af J., en tjenestemand i Kommissionens Generaldirektorat for Konkurrence (GD IV).
Once again, the Court finds that the Commission had those documents and, although it had taken the decision not to use them in order to prove the infringement, equality of arms nevertheless required that the applicant should have an opportunity likewise to decide whether or not to use them in its defence.
Ved skrivelse af 23. maj 1990 genfremsatte sagsøgerens advokat sin anmodning, idet han henviste til J.'s reaktion, hvorefter det — ifølge advokaten — var blevet ham nægtet at få adgang til sagens akter, herunder endog til de ikkefortrolige dokumenter. Efter advokatens oplysninger var en fortegnelse over sagens dokumenter ligeledes blevet nægtet meddelt.
Consequently, the three parts of the plea alleging infringement of the rights of the defence must be upheld and the contested decision annulled in so far as it concerns the applicant, without its being necessary to rule on the applicant's alternative claims seeking measures of inquiry allowing the files to be examined by its lawyers or by the Court itself.
Kommissionen skulle have erklæret, at den udelukkende ville acceptere anmodninger om at undersøge specifikke dokumenter. Denne restriktive holdning hos Kommissionens tjenestegrene ville gøre indgreb i sagsøgerens mulighed for at forberede sit forsvar.
There is also no need to consider the other pleas raised in support of its claim for annulment, in particular the plea alleging lack of objectivity, shown by deletions in the documents annexed to the second part of the statement of objections, the plea alleging that the evidence relied on to support certain findings in the decision was not sent to the applicant and the plea alleging irregular authentication of the contested decision, which does not relate to all the administrative procedure before the Commission.
Under høringen fremlagde Kommissionens kompetente tjenestegren visse dokumenter, som alle stammede fra sagsøgeren, og som ifølge Kommissionen i lighed med de allerede fremlagte dokumenter — var bevis på, hvorledes forbindelserne mellem sagsøgeren og Solvay i virkeligheden var.
Furthermore, certain documents concerning other producers or emanating from them were used as evidence by the Commission.
Den pågældende tjenestegren forklarede, at Kommissionen ikke havde anvendt dokumenterne mod Solvay, fordi de var fortrolige. Kommissionen havde ikke desto mindre besluttet nu at lade dem indgå i proceduren, ikke fordi de indeholdt supplerende elementer i forhold til de dokumenter, der var vedføjet meddelelsen af klagepunkter, men for at tage til genmæle over for sagsøgerens anbringende vedrørende den påståede dokumentmæssige bevissvaghed.
In those circumstances, the applicant had the right to request at least a list of the other documents contained in the files in question, in order perhaps to establish their precise content and their usefulness for its defence.
Med hensyn til adgangen til sagens akter erklærede høringskonsulenten, at det drejede sig om et vanskeligt problem.
By refusing to provide such a list, the Commission therefore impaired the applicant's rights of defence.
Ingen kunne vide, hvad begrebet »sagen« omfattede, og det måtte påhvile Fællesskabets retsinstanser at give en fortolkning heraf. Problemet skulle derfor ikke diskuteres under høringen.
Since the applicant cannot be required to show, on the basis of documents which in the absence of a list are unknown to it, that an undertaking such as Akzo or Matthes & Weber independently decided not to export to the United Kingdom, The Court:
Efter afslutningen af den ovenfor beskrevne procedure vedtog Kommissionen beslutning 91/297/EØF.
Annulled Commission Decision 91/297/EEC of 19 December 1990 relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EEC Treaty (JV/33.133-A: Soda-ash - Solvay, ICI) in so far as it concerns the applicant;
Ved skrivelse af 31. maj 1990 nægtede Kommissionen sagsøgeren adgang til samtlige sagens akter.
Ordered the Commission to pay the costs.'
Den gennem nærværende sagsanlæg anfægtede beslutning er blevet meddelt sagsøgeren ved rekommanderet skrivelse.
Case T-37/91 Imperial Chemical Industries pic ν Commission of the European Communities Competition
Påstanden om annullation af beslutningen om tilsidesættelse af retten til ved Kommissionens nægtelse af
Administrative procedure
Retten kan derfor ikke udelukke, at Kommissionen ville have fastslået, at overtrædelsen var mindre langvarig og mindre alvorlig, og følgelig have fastsat en mindre bøde.
In it the applicant protested against the refusal to grant access to the file and annexed several new documents as evidence.
Følgelig må første led i anbringendet tages til følge, og den anfægtede beslutning annulleres i det omfang, den vedrører sagsøgeren.
Following investigations carried out without warning in 1989 at the premises of the main soda-ash producers in the Community and supplemented by requests for information, the Commission sent to the applicant a statement of objections.
Retten bemærker, at reglerne om aktindsigt i konkurrencesager har til formål at give adressaterne for en meddelelse af klagepunkter mulighed for at gøre sig bekendt med bevismaterialet i Kommissionens sagsakter for på baggrund heraf at kunne tage stilling til de resultater, som Kommissionen er nået frem til i sin meddelelse af klagepunkter.
The Commission revealed to each undertaking the replies given by the other undertaking and stated that 'information which might be commercially sensitive (had again) been blanked out'.
Aktindsigt henhører således under de processuelle retssikkerhedsgarantier, som har til formål at beskytte retten til kontradiktion.
In a telephone call made on 14 May 1990 the applicant's lawyer requested access to the Commission's file in so far as it related to the infringements alleged against the applicant.
Vedrørende første led i anbringendet om den manglende meddelelse til sagsøgeren af visse dokumenter kan den fortrolige behandling, som de dokumenter og/eller den fortegnelse, som sagsøgeren bør have, eventuelt skal undergives, ikke på nogen måde begrunde Kommissionens fuldstændige afslag på fremsendelse.
At the hearing, the competent Commission department produced certain documents which all came from the applicant and which, according to the Commission, showed — like the documents already produced — the applicant's true behaviour and weakened its defence.
Det må således fastslås, at Kommissionen har tilsidesat sagsøgerens ret til kontradiktion ved ikke sammen med fremsendelsen af meddelelsen af klagepunkter at have meddelt dokumenterne med journalnr.
According to the department concerned, those new documents were introduced into the procedure not because they contained additional evidence compared with the documents annexed to the statement of objections, but in order to reply to the applicant's argument based on the alleged lack of documentary evidence.
IV, enten i form af bilag til meddelelsen eller i form af en fortegnelse.
The problem should not therefore be discussed at the hearing.
Det bemærkes atter, at mangelen ved den administrative procedure ikke kan afhjælpes under forhandlingerne for Retten, som indskrænker sig til en retlig kontrol alene inden for rammerne af de anførte anbringender, og som derfor ikke kan træde i stedet for en fuldstændig tilrettelæggelse af sagen inden for rammerne af den administrative procedure.
By letter of 23 May 1990, the applicant's lawyer repeated his request and referred to the reaction of Mr J who, he claimed, had refused to grant him any access to the file, even to documents which were not confidential.
Såfremt sagsøgeren nemlig ved hjælp af en passende fortegnelse havde fundet frem til dokumenter fra Solvay, der var diskulperende for de to virksomheder, havde sagsøgeren eventuelt kunnet påvirke Kommissionens vurderinger under den administrative procedure.
According to the lawyer, there had also been a refusal to provide a list of documents in the file. The Commission had stated that it was prepared only to accept requests to see specific documents.
Hvis sagsøgeren nemlig under den administrative procedure havde kunnet henvise til eventuelt diskulperende dokumenter, havde virksomheden
The Commission added that it had itself re-examined all those documents in order to check whether they were of such a kind as to exculpate the applicant, but had not found any such document; furthermore, it offered to examine the files again if the applicant established 'good cause' by reference to a specific factual or legal point.
Vedrørende tredje led i anbringendet om manglende meddelelse til sagsøgeren af dokumenter fra andre sodaproducenter i Fællesskabet fremgår det af det anførte om anbringendets første og andet led, at Kommissionen ligeledes, sagens specielle omstændigheder taget i betragtning, burde have fremskaffet en fortegnelse over de dokumenter, som indgår i andre producenters »sagsakter«.
The Commission then carried out an additional investigation in order to check certain statements made by the applicant regarding the rebates which a soda-ash producer established in the United States, Allied, had quoted to the United Kingdom glass manufacturer, Rockware. According to the documents before the Court, at the end of the abovementioned procedure the Commission adopted Decision 91/300/EEC.
Det følger heraf, at også en tredje tilsidesættelse af retten til kontradiktion er bevist.
The decision was notified to the applicant by registered letter of 1 March 1991.
var i besiddelse af disse dokumenter, og uagtet Kommissionen havde besluttet ikke at anvende dem til at påvise overtrædelsen, fører princippet om ligestilling af parterne ikke desto mindre til, at sagsøgeren skal have tilsvarende mulighed for at tage beslutning om eventuelt at anvende dokumenterne til sit forsvar.
With regard to the various stages of the abovementioned procedure, the Court considers that the very scheme of those rules implies a sequence of events whereby first, pursuant to the first paragraph of the provision, acts are adopted by the college of Commissioners and then authenticated before being notified, as appropriate, to the persons concerned, pursuant to the third paragraph, and possibly published in the Official Journal. Consequently, authentication of an act must necessarily precede its notification.
Det bemærkes desuden, at visse dokumenter vedrørende andre producenter eller hidrørende fra dem er blevet brugt af Kommissionen som bevis.
The Court observes at the outset that the purpose of providing access to the file is one of the procedural safeguards intended to protect the rights of the defence.
Under disse omstændigheder har sagsøgeren haft ret til i det mindste at anmode om en fortegnelse over andre dokumenter i de omhandlede sagsakter med henblik på eventuelt at undersøge deres nøjagtige indhold og tage stilling til, hvorvidt de kunne bruges til støtte for sagsøgerens indsigelser.
The proper observance of that general principle requires that the undertaking concerned be afforded the opportunity during the administrative procedure to make known its views on the truth and relevance of the facts, charges and circumstances relied on by the Commission.
Ved at nægte at fremkomme med en fortegnelse har Kommissionen således påvirket sagsøgerens ret til kontradiktion.
The applicant has not been hindered in exercising its rights of defence by not having a list of the documents emanating from itself.
Det hedder i domskonklusionen :
It follows that the plea alleging infringement of the rights of the defence must be dismissed in its entirety.
Kommissionens beslutning 91/297/EØF af 19. december 1990 om en procedure i henhold til EØF-traktatens artikel 85 (IV/33.133-A: Soda - Solvay, ICI) annulleres i det omfang, den vedrører sagsøgeren.
It is therefore unconnected with the question whether there are discrepancies between the texts adopted, notified and published and, if so, whether or not those discrepancies are material.
29.6.1995 procedure — ret til forretningsorden -
Consequently, the decision must be annulled in its entirety and it is not necessary to rule on the other pleas in law raised by the applicant in support of its claim for annulment.
»Konkurrence — misbrug af dominerende stilling — administrativ kontradiktion — ligestilling af parterne — aktindsigt — Kommissionens stadfæstelse af en beslutning vedtaget af kommissærkollegiet* (Første Udvidede Afdeling)
cure a material defect vitiating the contested decision simply by taking the step of retroactive regularization. That is especially true where, as in the present case, a decision is involved which imposes a fine on the undertaking concerned.
Kommissionen fremsendte til hver virksomhed de besvarelser, som den anden virksomhed havde fremsendt, og præciserede, at »oplysninger, som kunne udgøre forretningshemmeligheder [ligeledes var] blevet udeladt i besvarelserne«.
Annulled Commission Decision 91/300/EEC of 19 December 1990 relating to a proceeding under Article 86 of the EEC Treaty (IV/33.133-D: Soda-ash - ICI);
Ligeledes den 31. maj 1990 fremsendte sagsøgeren sine »indsigelser«.
Ordered the Commission to pay the costs.'
Alene sagsøgeren deltog heri.
Court of First Instance
Ved denne lejlighed fremlagde sagsøgeren et nyt indlæg, »sagsfremstillingen«, hvortil yderligere dokumenter var vedføjet.
Case T-107/94 Christina Kik ν Council of the European Union and Commission of the European Communities Institutional law
Efter advokatens oplysninger var en fortegnelse over sagens dokumenter ligeledes blevet nægtet meddelt.
(Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark inadmissibility of the action) (First Chamber)