The European Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over ECSC treaty disputes. The duty of sincere cooperation imposed the obligation on the national court to mitigate as far as possible in the interests of the Community the risk of a conflicting ruling. ‘As a body which supervises compliance with the Community rules of competition and has specialised departments for that purpose, the Commission has many years of experience with the result that its findings carry a degree of authority, although such authority is not binding. However, it is self-evident that no obstacles may be placed in the path of third parties seeking to challenge before the national court findings which the Commission has arrived at in a decision of that kind. If, on the basis of the parties’ arguments, the national court comes to the conclusion that the issues of fact and/or law decided by the Commission are incorrect or insufficient, or if at any rate it has serious doubts in that regard, then in the light of the Delimitis judgment it must take the following course of action: in the case of findings which carried no weight in the final decision and do not therefore underlie the reasoning of the Commission, the national court is at liberty to adopt a different interpretation: in those circumstances the risk of conflicting decisions and the resultant impairment of the principle of legal certainty is extremely small. On the other hand, in the case of findings which have an influence on the final decision arrived at by the Commission, the national court is well advised, in accordance with the provisions of its national procedural law, to suspend the proceedings in the case and to seek the necessary information from the Commission or make a direct reference to the court for a preliminary ruling concerning the validity of the decision in question or the interpretation of the relevant Community competition rules.’
Judges:
Advocate-General Van Gerven
Citations:
Times 13-May-1994, C-128/92, [1994] 5 CMLR 30, [1994] EUECJ C-128/92, [1994] ECR I-1209
Links:
Jurisdiction:
European
Citing:
Cited – Foto-Frost v Hauptzollamt Lubeck-Ost ECJ 22-Oct-1987
ECJ Lack of jurisdiction of national courts to declare acts of Community institutions invalid – Validity of a decision on the post-clearance recovery of import duties. . .
Cited – Stergios Delimitis v Henninger Brau AG ECJ 28-Feb-1991
ECJ A beer supply agreement is prohibited by Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty if two cumulative conditions are met. The first is that, having regard to the economic and legal context of the agreement at issue, it . .
Cited – Hurd v Jones (Judgment) ECJ 15-Jan-1986
‘ . . . [A] provision produces direct effect in relations between the Member States and their subjects only if it is clear and unconditional and not contingent on any discretionary implementing measure.’ and ‘According to a consistent line of . .
Cited by:
Cited – Crehan v Inntrepreneur Pub Company (CPC) CA 21-May-2004
The claimant had taken two leases, but had been made subject to beer ties with the defendant. He claimed damages for the losses, saying he had been forced to pay higher prices than those allowed to non-tied houses, and that the agreement was . .
Cited – Consorzio Del Prosciutto Di Parma v Asda Stores Limited and others HL 8-Feb-2001
The name ‘Parma Ham’ was controlled as to its use under Italian law, and the associated mark, the ‘corona ducale’, was to be applied to a sale of Parma Ham, including any packaging. Proper Parma Ham was imported and resold through the defendant’s . .
At ECJ – H J Banks and Co Ltd and Others v British Coal Corporation QBD 10-Aug-1994
No cause of action could be pursued where the European Commission only can decide liability and no decision had yet been made. An action would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction rather than be stayed until the decision was made. . .
At ECJ – Coal Authority v H J Banks and Company Ltd; H J Banks and Company Ltd v The Coal Authority and Anoher ComC 20-Dec-1996
ComC Summary judgment under RSC Order 14 – claim for royalties – previous decision of the European Commission – claim for damages for breach of article 4 European Coal and Steel Treaty. The defence to the Coal . .
First Reference – HJ Banks and Co Ltd v The Coal Authority and Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ECJ 20-Sep-2001
Europa Reference for a preliminary ruling: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) – United Kingdom. ECSC Treaty – Licences to extract raw coal – Discrimination between producers – Special charges – . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European, Utilities, Jurisdiction
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.160920