natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο δ ι ε υ κ ρ ί ν ισ ε ε π ί σ η ς τ ο ν τ ύ π ο υ π ό τ ο ν ο π ο ί ο ο ισ υ μ β α λ λ ό μ ε ν ο ι μ π ο ρ ο ύ ν , στοδιεθνέςεμπόριο, ν α δ η λ ώ σ ο υ ν ό τ ισ υ μ φ ω ν ο ύ ν σ χ ε τ ικ ά μ ε ρ ή τ ρ α π ε ρ ί π α ρ ε κ τ ά σ ε ω ς δ ι ε θ ν ο ύ ς δ ικ α ι ο δ ο σ ία ς κ α τ ά τ η ν έ ν ν ο ι α τ ο υ ά ρ θ ρ ο υ 17, πρώτοεδάφιο, δεύτερηπερίοδος, τρίτηπερίπτωση, τ η ς Σ υ μ β ά σ ε ω ς (α π ό φ α σ η τ η ς 16η ς Μ α ρ τ ί ο υ 1999, 0-159/97, Ο α Ξ ί ε Ι Ι β ί ή , Συλλογή1999, σ. 1-1597).
PILOTTI Massimo, Judge (L952-L958), President from L952to 1958SERRARENS Petrus Josephus Servatius, Judge (1952-1958)RIESE Otto, Judge (1952-1963)DELVAUX Louis, Judge (1952-1967)RUEFF Jacques, Judge(1952-1959 and 1960-1962)HAMMES CharlesL6on, Judge (I952-L967), President from t964 to 1967VAN KLEFFENSAdrianus, Judge (1952-1958)LAGRANGE Maurice,Advocate General (1952-1964)ROEMER Karl, Advocate General (1953-1973)ROSSI Rino, Judge (1958-1964)DONNER Andreas Matthias, Judge (1958-1979), President from 1958 to 1964CATALANO Nicola,Judge (1958-1962)TRABUCCHI Alberto, Judge (L962-I972), then Advocate General (1973-1976)LECOURT Robert, Judge (1962-1976), President from 1967 to 1976STRAUSS Walter,Judge (1963-1970)MONACO Riccardo, Judg e (L96a-197 6)
19η ς
- Presidents
Β — Σύνθεση τ ο υ Δ ικ α σ τ η ρ ί ο υ
A - Proceedings of the Court of First Instance in 1999 by Mr Bo Vesterdorf, President of the Court of First Instance
(Σ ε ι ρ ά π ρ ω τ ο κ ό λ λ ο υ σ τ ι ς
I. Activity of the Court of First Instance
Π ρ ώ τ η σ ε ι ρ ά α π ό τ α α ρ ισ τ ε ρ ά π ρ ο ς τ α δ ε ξ ι ά Κ . δ ο ίιΐη Ι :§ε η , δικαστής, ί. δενόη, δικαστής, Ι. Ο.
In the opening addresses given by the President of the Court of First Instance andthe President of the Court of Justice on that day, it was recalled that the Single
Μ ο ΐ Ι Ι ι ΐ η ο ά & Α1ηιεΐ(ΐ3 δικαστής, Ο. Ο. Κοάιΐ§ιιεζΐ£ΐεδΐ3δ, Πρόεδρος, Ό. Α. Ο. Εά\ν3ΐ*(Ι, δικαστής, Ν. Ρεηηείΐγ, π ρ ώ τ ο ς γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς , Ρ. Ο. ΐ30θβδ, γενικόςεισαγγελέας. Δ ε ύ τ ε ρ η σ ε ι ρ ά α π ό τ α α ρ ισ τ ε ρ ά π ρ ο ς τ α δ ε ξ ι ά Ρ .
European Act had opened the way for the institutional innovation which thecreation of this new Community court constituted. The stated objectives, set outin the preambleto Decision 88/591/ECSC,EEC, Euratom of 24 October 1988establishing the Court of First Instance, had been to improve the judicialprotection of individuals by establishing a second court and to enable the Courtof Justice to concentrate on its fundamental task of ensuring the uniforminterpretation of Community law.
Ο. Καρ1εγη, δικαστής, Α.
It was also mentioned that thought isnow being given to reform of the Community court structure.
Τ ρ ί τ η σ ε ι ρ ά α π ό τ α α ρ ισ τ ε ρ ά π ρ ο ς τ α δ ε ξ ι ά Ρ . Μ3(±εη, δικαστής, Α. δ3£§ΐο, γενικόςεισαγγελέας, δ.
During the study day of 19 October, two subjectswere elaboratedupon byeminent lawyers and gave rise to lively discussion.
Αίβεΐ", γενικόςεισαγγελέας, Ό.
The first subject was thejudicial protection of individuals.
τ ο υ Δ ικ α σ τ η ρ ί ο υ σ ε ι ρ ά α ν α λ ή ψ ε ω ς κ α θ η κ ό ν τ ω ν
is lower than the number recorded in 1997(624 cases).
Ο ίιΐδ ε ρ ρ ε
In 1999 no case was referred to the Court sitting in plenary session,nor was an Advocate General designated in any case.
Γεννήθηκετο1927· τ α κ τ ικ ό ς κ α θ η γ η τ ή ς τ ο υ ε ρ γ α τ ικ ο ύ δ ικ α ί ο υ (υ τ ο ΐ η ο , Μπολόνια, Ρώμη), τ ο υ σ υ γ κ ρ ι τ ικ ο ύ ι δ ι ω τ ικ ο ύ δ ικ α ί ο υ (Μ π ο λ ό ν ι α )· μ έ λ ο ς τ ο υ Α ν ω τ ά τ ο υ Δ ικ α σ τ ικ ο ύ Σ υ μ β ο υ λ ί ο υ (1976-1981)· γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ ι ς 7 Οκτωβρίου 1982 έωςτις6 Οκτωβρίου 1988· δικαστήςαπότις7 Οκτωβρίου 1988 έωςτις21 Ιουλίου 1999.
The number of applications for interim relief lodged in the course of 1999provides confirmation that this special form of proceedings is being used moreand more widely (38 applications in 1999, compared with 26 rn 1998 and 19 in1997); 37 sets of proceedings for interim relief were disposedof in the course ofthe year. The Court ordered the suspension of operation of the contested measure on three occasions.
Μ ο ί Ι ί η Ι ι ο ά β
In total, 72 appeals were brought before the Court of
Γεννήθηκετο 1936· ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς ε φ ε τ ώ ν Λ ισ α β ώ ν α ς - π ρ ο ϊ σ τ ά μ ε ν ο ς τ ο υ γ ρ α φ ε ί ο υ τ ο υ Υ π ο υ ρ γ ο ύ Δ ικ α ι ο σ ύ ν η ς · Γ ε ν ικ ό ς Α ν τ ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς τ η ς Δ η μ ο κ ρ α τ ία ς · δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς τ ο υ γ ρ α φ ε ί ο υ ε υ ρ ω π α ϊκ ο ύ δ ικ α ί ο υ κ α θ η γ η τ ή ς τ ο υ κ ο ι ν ο τ ικ ο ύ δ ικ α ί ο υ (Λ ισ α β ώ ν α )· δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ ι ς 31 Ιανουαρίου 1986.
In 1997 several groups of similar cases were brought: customs agents claiming compensation for harm suffered by reason of the completion of the internal market provided for by the Single European Act,officials seeking re-examination of their grade on recruitment, and cases concerning milk quotas.
Ο α Η ο δ
Page 81
Γεννήθηκετο1939· ϋ α π ΐ δ ί β Γ υ π ά λ λ η λ ο ς σ τ η Γ ρ α μ μ α τ ε ία τ η ς Ε υ ρ ω π α ϊκ ή ς Ε π ι τ ρ ο π ή ς τ ω ν Α ν θ ρ ω π ί ν ω ν Δ ικ α ι ω μ ά τ ω ν ε ισ η γ η τ ή ς σ τ ο γ ρ α φ ε ί ο τ ο υ γ ε ν ικ ο ύ ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α Ι .
Of ttre72 appeals, 16 were broughtagainstthe judgments deliveredby the Court of First Instance in twogroups of competition cases.
Ρ»υ1 ,Ιοαη
The main proposal was an increase to 2L in the number of Judges of the Court of First Instance.
Ο ι Η δ ϋ α η
27 and 28 May 1999.
Ο βίΐν^ Ε ά ^ν α Γ ά
Developments in the case-law
Γ ε ν ν ή θ η κ ε γ ρ α μ μ α τ έ α ς το 1934* δ ικ η γ ό ρ ο ς κ α ικ α τ ό π ι ν τ α μ ία ς
The principal advancesin the case-law in 1999 are set out below, groupedaccording to the main subject areas of the disputeswhich were before the Court.
Σ υ μ β ο υ λ ί ο υ τ ω ν τ η ς τ ω ν δ ικ η γ ο ρ ικ ώ ν δ α ί ν ε δ β η σ τ ο ν σ υ λ λ ό γ ω ν τ ο μ έ α
The case-law concerning competition rules applicable to undertakings wasdeveloped by judgments concerning the ECSC Treaty, the EC Treaty and Council
Κοινότητας· καθηγητής
December 1989 on the control of
Ε υ ρ ω π α ϊκ ή ς Ε υ ρ ω π α ϊκ ώ ν Π α ν ε π ισ τ ή μ ι ο Β ο υ λ ή ς τ ω ν Β β η ο ϊ ί β τ τ ο υ
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 2l concentrations between undertakinss.
Ο τ η ν σ τ ο
(a) The ECSC Treaty
1η Σ ε π τ ε μ β ρ ί ο υ Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό η ν 'δ Ι η η , Λονδίνο· δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο Π ρ ω τ ο δ ικ ε ί ο α π ό 1989 έωςτις9 Μαρτίου1992· δικαστήςτις10 Μαρτίου 1992.
The Court delivered its judgments in a series of 11 cases brought in 1994 whichhad arisen from CommissionDecisiong4l}ls/Ecsc of 16 February 1994 relatingto a proceeding pursuant to Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty concerning agreementsand concerted practices engaged in by European producers of steel beams.
Β Η
Page 83
1^3 Ρ β Γ β ο Ι » το 1931· κ α θ η γ η τ ή ς τ ο υ σ υ ν τ α γ μ α τ ικ ο ύ κ α ι τ ο υ γ ε ν ικ ο ύ κ α ι δ η μ ο σ ί ο υ δ ικ α ί ο υ σ τ α π α ν ε π ισ τ ή μ ι α τ η ς Π ά δ ο υ α ς , τ η ς κ α ι τ η ς Ρ ώ μ η ς - μ έ λ ο ς τ ο υ Α ν ω τ ά τ ο υ Δ ικ α σ τ ικ ο ύ (1976-1978)· μ έ λ ο ς τ ο υ Σ υ ν τ α γ μ α τ ικ ο ύ Δ ικ α σ τ η ρ ί ο υ κ α ι τ ο υ Σ υ ν τ α γ μ α τ ικ ο ύ Δ ικ α σ τ η ρ ί ο υ (1986-1987)· Υπουργός
The partial annulment of the decision for lack of proof thus relatesonly to minor aspects of the alleged infringements. The level of proof requiredin order to establish that an infringement of Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty has been committed is set out in particular in the judgment in Thyssen Stahl, whereit is stated that attendance by an undertaking at meetings involvinganti-competitive activities sufficesto establish its participation in those activities, in the absence of proof capable of establishing the contrary.
Γ ε ν ν ή θ η κ ε σ υ γ κ ρ ι τ ικ ο ύ Μ π ο λ ό ν ι α ς Σ υ μ β ο υ λ ί ο υ π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς Κ ο ι ν ο τ ικ ώ ν δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο
The Court also held that the allegations that the Commissionhad, under its policyfor the management of the crisis in the steel industry, encouragedor toleratedthe the infringements which had been recorded were not well founded.
Πολιτικών(1987-1989)· Ε υ ρ ω β ο υ λ ε υ τ ή ς (1989-1994)- Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ ι ς 7 Οκτωβρίου1994 έωςτις31 1994· γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ η ν 1η
However, the fundamental contribution of these judgments is, without a doubttheir clarification of the scope of the competition rules in the ECSC Treaty and,more particularly, the ruling that the legal concepts contained in Article 65 of that
1999* δικαστής σ τ ο
Treaty do not differ from those referred to in Article 85 of the EC Treaty (now Article 81 EC).
Δ ε κ ε μ β ρ ί ο υ Ι α ν ο υ α ρ ί ο υ Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο
As regards, first of all, the spectfic characteristics of the legislative frameworklaid down by the ECSC Treaty, which need to be taken into account when
Γεννήθηκετο 1936· Σ ύ μ β ο υ λ ο ς Ε π ικ ρ α τ ε ία ς (Γαλλία)· δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς κ α ικ α τ ό π ι ν γ ε ν ικ ό ς δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς τ η ς Ν ο μ ικ ή ς Υ π η ρ ε σ ία ς τ ο υ Σ υ μ β ο υ λ ί ο υ τ ω ν Ε υ ρ ω π α ϊκ ώ ν Κ ο ι ν ο τ ή τ ω ν (1968-1973)· γ ε ν ικ ό ς δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς τ η ς Α β ε η ο ε η Ε ΐ ϊ ο η ζ ι Ι ε ρ ο ι ι τ Γ ε ι η ρ ί ο ί (1973-1975)· δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς γ ε ν ικ ώ ν δ ι ο ικ η τ ικ ώ ν υ π η ρ ε σ ιώ ν τ ο υ Υ π ο υ ρ γ ε ί ο υ Β ι ο μ η χ α ν ία ς (1977-1979)· δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς ν ο μ ικ ώ ν υ π ο θ έ σ ε ω ν τ ο υ Ο Ο Σ Α (1979-1985)· δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς τ ο υ Δ ι ε θ ν ο ύ ς Ι ν σ τ ι τ ο ύ τ ο υ Δ η μ ο σ ία ς Δ ι ο ικ ή σ ε ω ς (1985-1987)- _BAR_ι ι π 5 ο ο η 8ΐ ι 1ΐ 6, δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς ν ο μ ικ ώ ν υ π ο θ έ σ ε ω ν τ ο υ Υ π ο υ ρ γ ε ί ο υ σ τ ο
C-tT6/99 P), Case T-1,38/94 Cockerill-Sambre v Commission Case T-14I/94 Thyssen Stahl v Commission(under appeal, Case C-l94 /99 P), Case T-145/94 Unimdtal v Commission, Case T-I47 /94 Krupp Hoeschv Commission (under appeal, Case C-195/99 P), Case T-148194 Preussag v Commission (under appeal, Case
Ε ξ ω τ ε ρ ικ ώ ν (1987-1994)- δ ικ α σ τ ή ς Ο κ τ ω β ρ ί ο υ 1994.
With the exception of the judgmentrn Thyssen Stahl v Commission which will be reported in full, the ECRwill contain only those paragraphs of the other judgments which, in the Court's view, it is useful to report.
Γεννήθηκετο1943· δ ι ε υ θ υ ν τ ή ς τ ο υ Υ π ο υ ρ γ ε ί ο υ Δ ικ α ι ο σ ύ ν η ς τ η ς Β α υ α ρ ία ς · π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς τ ο υ Σ υ ν τ α γ μ α τ ικ ο ύ Δ ικ α σ τ η ρ ί ο υ τ η ς Σ α ξ ω ν ία ς κ α ι τ ο υ Ε φ ε τ ε ί ο υ τ η ς Δ ρ έ σ δ η ς (1992-1994)· ε π ί τ ι μ ο ς κ α θ η γ η τ ή ς τ ο υ ε υ ρ ω π α ϊκ ο ύ δ ικ α ί ο υ κ α ι τ ο υ ι α τ ρ ικ ο ύ δ ικ α ί ο υ σ τ ο Π α ν ε π ισ τ ή μ ι ο τ ο υ 5α α ι 1 > η ί ε ΐ £6η · δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ ι ς 7 Οκτωβρίου1994.
Moreover, the Court responded to the argument that the Commission hadmisconstrued the scope of Article 65(1) of the ECSC Treaty by stating that, whilethe oligopolistic character of the markets covered by the Treaty may, to someextent, weaken the effects of competition, that consideration cannot justiff aninterpretation of Article 65 authorising undertakings to behavein such a way asreduces competition even further, particularly through price-fixing. In view ofthe consequences which the oligopolistic structure of the market may have, it isall the more necessary to protect residual competition (udgment in ThyssenStahl).
(ΟΤΕ) τ ο υ Π α ν ε π ισ τ η μ ί ο υ Δ ικ α ι ο σ ύ ν η ς · σ ύ μ β ο υ λ ο ς Ε ξ ω τ ε ρ ικ ώ ν δ ικ α σ τ ή ς
of "agreement"in Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (in that regard, see Case T-1/89Rhöne-Poulenc v Commission U9911 ECR II-867, paragraph120). 120).
ΕΖΕΣ" Πρόεδροςτουαπότις19 Ιανουαρίου
The prohibition by Article 65(1) of the ECSC Treaty of "concertedpractices" inprinciple has the same purpose as the parallel prohibition of "concertedpractices" practices" in Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty.
Γ ε ν ν ή θ η κ ε υ η ί ν 6Γ δ ίΐγ Π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς το1942- Μ α δ Ι ε τ ο ίΑ ιϊδ ο ικ ο ν ο μ ικ ώ ν ε π ισ τ η μ ώ ν τ ο υ Ο ο 1ΐ 6£6, Δουβλίνο· β α Γ Π δ ΐ €Γ - α ι-Ε Ε \ν · δ ε π ί ο τ Ο ο υ η δ ε Γ τ ο υ Ε ε ^Ι Α ί ά Β Ο Η Π Ικ α ι τ ο υ Β α τ Ο ο ι ι η ο ί Γ γ ε ν ικ ό ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ ι ς 19 Ιανουαρίου 1995.
More particularly, it seeksto ensure theeffectiveness of theprohibitionunder Article a(d) of the ECSC Treaty by bringing within that prohibition a form of coordination between undertakings which,without having reached the stage where an agreement properly so-called has beenconcluded, knowingly substitutes practical cooperation between them for the risksof normal competition under the ECSC Treaty (udgment in ThyssenStah[).
Ο ο η δ φ
Stah[).
Μ β Ι ε Ι ι ί ο Γ λ Υ α Ι Η ε Ι β ί τ η ς Κ υ β ε ρ ν ή σ ε ω ς , Υ π ο υ ρ γ ό ς ν ε ι ν ΐ ε Γ δ · Α ν τ ι π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς τ η ς κ α ι Ο ικ ο ν ο μ ικ ώ ν (1992-1995)·
As regards the argument that the concept of a "concerted practice" in Article 65(1) of the ECSC Treaty presupposes that the undertakings have engaged in the practices which were the subject of their concertation, in particular byuniformly increasing their prices, the Court held (udgment in ThyssenStah[) thatthe case-law relating to the EC Treaty can be transposedto the sphere ofapplication of Article 65 of the ECSC Treaty; accordingly, in order to be able to conclude that a concerted practice existed,it is not necessary for the concertationto have had an effect on the conduct of competitors on the market.
Γεννήθηκετο1949* Α ν τ ι π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς Ε θ ν ικ ή ς Ά μ υ ν α ς (1995)- δ ή μ α ρ χ ο ς Κ υ β ε ρ ν ή σ ε ω ς , Υ π ο υ ρ γ ό ς Δ ικ α ι ο σ ύ ν η ς
It is sufficient to find that each undertaking was bound to take into account, directly orindirectly, the information obtained during its contacts with its competitors.
Α ν τ ι π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς τ η ς Κ υ β ε ρ ν ή σ ε ω ς , Υ π ο υ ρ γ ό ς Δ ικ α ι ο σ ύ ν η ς κ α ι Μ ε σ α ί ω ν Τ ά ξ ε ω ν (1988-1991)· βουλευτής(1977-1995)· πτυχιούχοςνομικήςκαι τ η ς σ τ ο α π ό ο ικ ο ν ο μ ικ ώ ν ε π ισ τ η μ ώ ν (Π α ν ε π ισ τ ή μ ι ο (Η α Γ ν α τ ά υ η ΐ ν β Γ δ ί τ ν , ΗΠΑ)· κ α θ η γ η τ ή ς τ η ς Λ ο υ β α ί ν δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο
The Court also made it clear that undertakings "engage" in a concerted practice withinthe meaning of Article 65(5) of the ECSC Treaty where they take part in ascheme which is designed to eliminate the uncertaintyabout their future marketconduct and necessarily implies that each of them takes into account theinformation obtained from its competitors.
Λιέγης)· Μ ίΐδ ί Θ Γ ο ί Ε α ν ν δ Κ α θ ο λ ικ ό Π α ν ε π ισ τ ή μ ι ο τ ι ς 19 Σεπτεμβρίου 1995.
It is therefore not necessary todemonstrate that the exchanges of information in question led to a specific resultor were put into effect on the relevant market.
Γεννήθηκετο 1936" ν ο μ ικ έ ς σ π ο υ δ έ ς σ τ α π α ν ε π ισ τ ή μ ι α τ ο υ Τ ϋ Ι > ί η £6η , τ ο υ Β ε ρ ο λ ί ν ο υ , τ ο υ Π α ρ ισ ι ο ύ , τ ο υ Α μ β ο ύ ρ γ ο υ , τ η ς Β ι έ ν ν η ς · σ υ μ π λ η ρ ω μ α τ ικ έ ς σ π ο υ δ έ ς σ τ ο Τ ο ρ ί ν ο κ α ισ τ ο Ο Ά π ώ ή ά β ε · μ έ λ ο ς τ ο υ Β υ η ά θ δ ί Η β α π ό τ ο 1969 μέχριτο1980· β ο υ λ ε υ τ ή ς σ τ ο Ε υ ρ ω π α ϊκ ό Κ ο ι ν ο β ο ύ λ ι ο τ ο 1977- μ έ λ ο ς κ α ισ τ η σ υ ν έ χ ε ι α π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς (1993-1994) σ τ η ν ε π ι τ ρ ο π ή ν ο μ ικ ώ ν υ π ο θ έ σ ε ω ν κ α ι δ ικ α ι ω μ ά τ ω ν τ ο υ π ο λ ί τ η · π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς τ η ς α ν τ ι π ρ ο σ ω π ε ία ς γ ι α τ ι ς σ χ έ σ ε ι ς μ ε τ ι ς χ ώ ρ ε ς τ η ς Β α λ τ ικ ή ς κ α θ ώ ς κ α ι τ ω ν υ π ο ε π ι τ ρ ο π ώ ν γ ι α τ η ν π ρ ο σ τ α σ ία τ ω ν δ ε δ ο μ έ ν ω ν κ α ι γ ι α τ ι ς τ ο ξ ικ έ ς ή ε π ικ ί ν δ υ ν ε ς ο υ σ ί ε ς · α ν τ ι π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς τ ο υ Ε υ ρ ω π α ϊκ ο ύ Κ ο ι ν ο β ο υ λ ί ο υ α π ό τ ο 1984 μέχριτο1992· γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ ι ς 7 Οκτωβρίου 1997. Page 87
In the judgment in Unimötal v Commission, the Court recalled the case-lawaccording to which the fact that a subsidiary has separate legal personality is not sufficient to rule out the possibility of its conduct being attributed to the parentcompany, in particular where the subsidiary does not determine its market conduct independentlybut in all material respectscarries out the instructions given to it by the parent company (see Case 48169 ICI v Commissionll972l ECR619), and on that basis attributed responsibility in the reverse direction by holding the subsidiary answerable for the infringement committed by the parent company.The Court had regard to the case-law of the Court of Justice in ICI v Commission and to the fact that the company responsible for coordinating the action of a group
Γεννήθηκετο 1934· δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο Τ π ο ι ι η α ί ε Ν ε α π ό λ ε ω ς · ε φ έ τ η ς σ τ ο Ε φ ε τ ε ί ο Ρ ώ μ η ς , έ π ε ι τ α δ ικ α σ τ ή ς τ ο υ Α κ υ ρ ω τ ικ ο ύ " α κ ό λ ο υ θ ο ς σ τ ο υ ί ί ϊ ο ΐ ο Ι ε β ί δ ΐ ϋ ΐ ί ν ο ά ε ΐ π π η ϊ δ Ι ε ί Ό ά ί Ο π ι ζ ΐ α ε Ο ΐιΐδ Ι ϊ ζ ϊ^ π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς τ η ς γ ε ν ικ ή ς ε π ι τ ρ ο π ή ς γ ι α τ η δ ι π λ ω μ α τ ικ ή σ υ ν δ ι ά σ κ ε ψ η π ο υ ε ξ ε π ό ν η σ ε τ η Σ ύ μ β α σ η τ ο υ Λ ο υ γ κ ά ν ο · ε ισ η γ η τ ή ς σ τ ο γ ρ α φ ε ί ο τ ο υ Ι τ α λ ο ύ γ ε ν ικ ο ύ ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο " κ α θ η γ η τ ή ς σ τ η δ ο ν ι ο ΐ α δ ΐ ι ρ ε π ο τ ε ά ε ΐΐίΐ ρ ι Λ Μ ΐ ο * α π ι ι η ΐ η ί δ ί Γ α ζ ϊ ο η ε α ϊΚ ο π ι ά · δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο Π ρ ω τ ο δ ικ ε ί ο α π ό τ ι ς 25 Σεπτεμβρίου 1989 έωςτις17 Σεπτεμβρίου1995· Π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς τ ο υ Π ρ ω τ ο δ ικ ε ί ο υ α π ό τ ι ς 18 Σεπτεμβρίου 1995 έωςτις 4 Μαρτίου 1998" γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ ι ς 5 Μαρτίου 1998.
In the case of .4ristrainv Commission, the applicant, Aristrain Madrid - the onlyundertaking in the Aristrain group to which the decision had been addressed -disputed, first, that it could be held responsible for the conduct of its sistercompany, Aristrain Olaberria, which was legally independent and bore soleresponsibility for its own commercial activity and, second, that a fine could beimposed on it of an amount which took account not only of its conduct andturnover but also of those of the sister company. The Court stated that, in viewof the economic unit formed by a parent group and its subsidiaries,the actionsof subsidiariesmay in certain conditions be attributed to a parent company.However, in the case before it, since, owing to the composition of the group andthe dispersal of its shareholders,it was impossible or exceedingly difficult toidentify the legal person at its head to which, as the person responsible for coordinating the group's activities, responsibility could have been attributed forthe infringements committed by the various companies in the group, the
Γεννήθηκετο1945* μ έ λ ο ς τ ο υ Δ ικ η γ ο ρ ικ ο ύ Σ υ λ λ ό γ ο υ Ι ρ λ α ν δ ία ς (1972)· ν ο μ ικ ό ς σ ύ μ β ο υ λ ο ς σ ε θ έ μ α τ α β ι ο μ η χ α ν ικ ή ς κ α ι ε μ π ο ρ ικ ή ς ι δ ι ο κ τ η σ ία ς (1973-1979)· ο Α Γ τ ΐ δ Ι β Γ (1979-1995) κ α ισ τ η σ υ ν έ χ ε ι α δ ε η ί ο Γ Ο ο α η δ θ ΐ (1995-1998) σ τ ο ν Δ ικ η γ ο ρ ικ ό Σ ύ λ λ ο γ ο Ι ρ λ α ν δ ία ς * ε ί ν α ι ε π ί σ η ς μ έ λ ο ς τ ο υ Δ ικ η γ ο ρ ικ ο ύ Σ υ λ λ ό γ ο υ Α γ γ λ ία ς κ α ι Ο υ α λ ία ς · δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο Η ί β η Ο Ο Ι Ι Γ Ι τ η ς Ι ρ λ α ν δ ία ς (1998)· λ έ κ τ ω ρ σ τ ο θ έ μ α «Ν ο μ ικ ά σ υ σ τ ή μ α τ α κ α ι μ έ θ ο δ ο ι » κ α ι λ έ κ τ ω ρ «Α ν β π ΐ Ό β ν β Γ β Ι Ι » τουεμπορικούδικαίου (Τ η η ί Ι ν Ο ο Ι Ι β β ©, Δουβλίνο)· β ε η ο η β Γ τ ο υ Η ο η ο η Μ α δ ο α β ϊ ν ο ί Κ ί η β 'δ Ι η η δ · δ ικ α σ τ ή ς σ τ ο Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο α π ό τ ι ς 6 Οκτωβρίου1999.
In the judgment in British Steel v Commission (Case T- 15Ll94), the Court pointedout that, in the absence of extenuatingor aggravatingcircumstances, or other dulyestablished exceptional circumstances, the Commission is required, by virtue ofthe principle of equal treatment, to apply, for the purpose of calculating the fine,the same percentage of turnover to undertakings which took part in the same infringement.
Δ ικ α σ τ η ρ ί ο υ κ α τ ά το 1999 ο ι ε ξ ή ς μ ε τ α β ο λ έ ς σ τ η σ ύ ν θ ε σ η τ ο υ
involved enabled the Commission to establish an infringement more easily and,where relevant, to bring it to an end.
Το1999 σ η μ ε ιώ θ η κ α ν Δ ικ α σ τ η ρ ί ο υ : δικαστής1999, του
Finally, the Court held that the fixing of a fine, in the exercise of its unlimitedjurisdiction, is by nature not an arithmetically precise exercise.
Β α σ ί λ ε ι ο ς δ ικ α σ τ ή ο α ρ τ ί ο υ
In theexercise of its unlimited jurisdiction, the Court reduced some of the fines, thusbringing their total amount down to EUR 65 449 000.
Στις8 Ιουνίου1999 α ν έ λ α β ε κ α θ ή κ ο ν τ α Σ κ ο υ ρ ή ς , κατόπιντουθανάτου, στις10 Μ Κ ρ α τ ε ρ ο ύ Μ . Ιωάννου.
With regard to matters of a more procedural nature, the Court referred in someof the judgments to its case-law, which beganwith its judgment in Joined Cases
Ο.
The
Ρ ο ά ϋ π ο ο Μ & η ο ί η ΐ , στις 21 Ι ο υ λ ί ο υ Ρ ε Γ §ο 1 α , γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς σ τ ο δ ικ α σ τ ή σ τ ι ς 15 Δεκεμβρίου 1999. Κ α τ ό π ι ν τ ο υ θ α ν ά τ ο υ τ ο υ δ ικ α σ τ ή 1999, ο Α η ΐ ο η ί ο Μ & π ο Ι Λ Δ ικ α σ τ ή ρ ι ο , ανέλαβεκαθήκοντα 89
It was also in Aristain v Commission that the Court ruled on a plea forannulment alleging infringement of the right to an independent and impartialtribunal. The applicant contended in particular that the guarantees enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the ECHR") had been violated because, first, theprocedure followed by the Commission does not confer the functions of
Σ ε ι ρ έ ς π ρ ω τ ο κ ό λ λ ο υ α π ό τ η ν
Commission lI 99 8 l ECR II-1875).
ΕΕΟΕΚ, π ρ ώ τ ο ς γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Ο .
On appeal by the Commission, the Court of Justice, in its
ΜΑΝΟΝΙ, δ ικ α σ τ ή ς Ε Ο . ΜΟΙΤΙΝΗΟΌΕΑΕΜΕΙΌΑ, δ ικ α σ τ ή ς Ρ .
Joirrrd Cases T-305194, T-306/94, T-307/g4, T-313/g4 to T-316 /g4, T-318/g4, T-325/g4, T-328/g4,
ΚΑΟΝΕΜΑΕΜ, δ ικ α σ τ ή ς Ε . δ Ε ν Ο Ν , δ ικ α σ τ ή ς Ν . ΡΕΝΝΕΕΕΥ, γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Ό .
With regard to the claims for annulment of the decision, the Court consideredfirst the pleas alleging defects of form and procedure and then the pleas on thesubstance.
Μ Ι δ Ο Η Ο , γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Α . δ Α Ο Ο Ι Ο , γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Β .
While none of the pleas as to procedure raised by the applicants was upheld, someof the Court's findings should be noted.
ΟΚΑδδ, γραμματέας
The Court
ΚΑΡΤΕΥΝ, δ ικ α σ τ ή ς Ο . Ο υ Ε Μ Α Ν Ν , δ ικ α σ τ ή ς Α .
It held that the Commission had acted consistently with the principle in question.
ΚΑΟΝΕΜΑΕΜ, δικαστήςϋ.
Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February t96?
ΑΕΒΕΚ, γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Ε Μ Ι δ Ο Η Ο , γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Α . δ Α Ο Ο Ι Ο , γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Β .
(First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty, OJ, English Special Edition 1959-1962,p. 87).
15 Δεκεμβρίου έωςτις 31 Δεκεμβρίου 1999
concerned and the case's complexity.
ΡΕΝΝΕΕΕΥ, π ρ ώ τ ο ς γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Κ . δ Ο Η Ι Ν Τ Ο Ε Ν , π ρ ό ε δ ρ ο ς τ ο υ δ ε υ τ έ ρ ο υ τ μ ή μ α τ ο ς Ρ .
Secondly, it is only on receipt of the statement of objectionsthat an undertaking may take cognisanceof the subject-matter of the procedurewhich is initiated against it and of the conduct of which it is accused by the Commission.
ΚΑΟΝΕΜΑΕΜ, δ ικ α σ τ ή ς Ό .
Article 308 EC respectively).
Κ υ ΐ Ζ ^Α Κ Α Β Ο Ο Ο Ε Ο Μ Ε Κ , γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Μ . \¥ΑΤΗΕΕΕΤ, δικαστήςδ. ΑΕΒΕΚ, γ ε ν ικ ό ς ε ισ α γ γ ε λ έ α ς Ι .
The scope of the judgment of 15 June 1994 was likewise discussed before the Court, since certain applicants contendedthat the annulment of the 1988 decision by the Court of Justice had called into question the validity of the preparatorymeasures taken before that decision was adopted.
Δ ικ α σ τ η ρ ί ο υ
Court of Justice.