Interim Judicial Protection Against Publication of Confidential Information in Commission Antitrust Decisions

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW
Paolo Iannuccelli
{"title":"Interim Judicial Protection Against Publication of Confidential Information in Commission Antitrust Decisions","authors":"Paolo Iannuccelli","doi":"10.54648/woco2019004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The publication, in the name of transparency, of Commission decisions finding infringements of EU competition law is a powerful tool for enhancing the private enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’). Before publishing those decisions, the Commission must nonetheless be careful to afford ‘very special protection’ to the legitimate interest of the undertakings concerned in the protection of their business secrets and other confidential information. When preparing the non-confidential version of the decision to be published, the Commission involves those undertakings, which have the right to object and, where they consider it appropriate, to refer the matter to the Hearing Officer, whose decisions may in turn be challenged before the EU Courts. In such cases, interim relief is essential to safeguard the undertakings’ right to the protection of confidential information, as well as their right to effective judicial protection. The recent case law of both EU Courts on interim protection in this context is marked by a high degree of technicality and struggles to adapt the ordinary interpretation of the conditions required for the granting of interim measures to the specificities of this kind of case. This article examines several rather complex interlocutory orders in an attempt to extract the logic behind them.","PeriodicalId":43861,"journal":{"name":"World Competition","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Competition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/woco2019004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The publication, in the name of transparency, of Commission decisions finding infringements of EU competition law is a powerful tool for enhancing the private enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’). Before publishing those decisions, the Commission must nonetheless be careful to afford ‘very special protection’ to the legitimate interest of the undertakings concerned in the protection of their business secrets and other confidential information. When preparing the non-confidential version of the decision to be published, the Commission involves those undertakings, which have the right to object and, where they consider it appropriate, to refer the matter to the Hearing Officer, whose decisions may in turn be challenged before the EU Courts. In such cases, interim relief is essential to safeguard the undertakings’ right to the protection of confidential information, as well as their right to effective judicial protection. The recent case law of both EU Courts on interim protection in this context is marked by a high degree of technicality and struggles to adapt the ordinary interpretation of the conditions required for the granting of interim measures to the specificities of this kind of case. This article examines several rather complex interlocutory orders in an attempt to extract the logic behind them.
委员会反垄断决定中保密信息公开的临时司法保护
以透明度的名义,公布委员会发现违反欧盟竞争法的决定,是加强《欧盟运作条约》(TFEU)第101条和第102条私人执行的有力工具。然而,在公布这些决定之前,委员会必须谨慎地为有关企业的合法利益提供“非常特殊的保护”,以保护其商业秘密和其他机密信息。在准备公布决定的非保密版本时,欧盟委员会涉及那些有权提出反对的企业,并在他们认为适当的情况下,将此事提交给听证官,听证官的决定可能会在欧盟法院受到质疑。在这种情况下,临时救济对于保障企业的保密信息保护权和获得有效司法保护的权利至关重要。在这种情况下,两个欧盟法院最近关于临时保护的判例法的特点是高度技术性,并且努力使对授予临时措施所需条件的普通解释适应这类案件的特殊性。本文考察了几个相当复杂的中间命令,试图提取其背后的逻辑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信