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 62011CN0138

    Case C-138/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria), lodged on 21 March 2011 — Compass-Datenbank GmbH v Republik Österreich

    OJ C 186, 25.6.2011, p. 12–12 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    25.6.2011   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 186/12

    Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria), lodged on 21 March 2011 — Compass-Datenbank GmbH v Republik Österreich

    (Case C-138/11)

    2011/C 186/20

    Language of the case: German

    Referring court

    Oberster Gerichtshof

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Appellant: Compass-Datenbank GmbH

    Respondent: Republik Österreich

    Interested parties: Bundeskartellanwalt, Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde

    Questions referred

    1.

    Is Article 102 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that a public authority acts as an undertaking if it stores in a database (business undertakings register) the information reported by undertakings on the basis of statutory reporting obligations and allows inspection and/or printouts to be made in return for payment, but prohibits any more extensive use?

    If the reply to Question 1 is in the negative:

    2.

    Does a public authority act as an undertaking in the case where, in reliance on its sui generis right to protection as the producer of a database, it prohibits uses which go beyond that of allowing inspection and the creation of printouts?

    If the reply to Questions 1 or 2 is in the affirmative:

    3.

    Is Article 102 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that the principles laid down in the judgments in Joined Cases C-241/91 P and C-242/91 P RTE and ITP [1995] ECR I-743 and in Case C-418/01 IMS Health [2004] ECR I-5039 (‘essential facilities doctrine’) are also to be applied if there is no ‘upstream market’ because the protected data are collected and stored in a database (business undertakings register) in the course of a public-authority activity?
    Top