Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62007CO0386

    Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 May 2008.
    Hospital Consulting Srl and Others v Esaote SpA and Others.
    Reference for a preliminary ruling: Consiglio di Stato - Italy.
    Rules of procedure - Articles 92(1) and 104(3) - Community competition rules - National rules concerning lawyers’ fees - Setting of professional scales of charges - Partial inadmissibility - Answers to questions which may be deduced from the case-law of the Court.
    Case C-386/07.

    European Court Reports 2008 I-00067*

    ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2008:256





    Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 May 2008 – Hospital Consulting and Others v Esaote and Others

    (Case C‑386/07)

    Rules of procedure – Articles 92(1) and 104(3) – Community competition rules – National rules concerning lawyers’ fees – Setting of professional scales of charges – Partial inadmissibility – Answers to questions which may be deduced from the case-law of the Court

    1.                     Competition – Community rules – Obligations of the Member States – Legislation intended to reinforce the effects of pre-existing agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Meaning (Arts 10 EC, 81 EC and 82 EC) (see paras 18-27, operative part 1)

    2.                     Preliminary rulings – Admissibility – Questions referred without sufficient explanation of the factual and legislative context – Questions referred in a context making a useful answer impossible – Manifest inadmissibility (Art. 234 EC) (see paras 29-35, operative part 2)

    Re:

    Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consiglio di Stato – Interpretation of Articles 10 and 81(1) EC and Directive 98/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 to facilitate practice of the profession of lawyer on a permanent basis in a Member State other than that in which the qualification was obtained (OJ 1998 L 77, p. 36) – Fixing by a national professional organisation of mandatory tariffs for lawyers’ services subject to ministerial approval – National rules prohibiting judges in decisions on costs from derogating from the set minimum fees.

    Operative part

    1.

    Articles 10 EC and 81 EC do not preclude a national law which in principle prohibits derogation from minimum fees approved by ministerial decree, on the basis of a draft drawn up by a professional body of lawyers such as the Consiglia nazionale forense, and which also prohibits the court, when it decides the amount of costs that the unsuccessful party must pay to the other party, from derogating from those minimum fees.

    2.

    The third question referred by the Consiglio di Stato by decision of 13 January 2006 is manifestly inadmissible.

    Top