This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017TA0249
Case T-249/17: Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — Casino, Guichard-Perrachon and AMC v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Administrative procedure — Decision ordering an inspection — Plea of illegality against Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Right to an effective remedy — Equality of arms — Obligation to state reasons — Right to inviolability of the home — Sufficiently strong evidence — Proportionality)
Case T-249/17: Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — Casino, Guichard-Perrachon and AMC v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Administrative procedure — Decision ordering an inspection — Plea of illegality against Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Right to an effective remedy — Equality of arms — Obligation to state reasons — Right to inviolability of the home — Sufficiently strong evidence — Proportionality)
Case T-249/17: Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — Casino, Guichard-Perrachon and AMC v Commission (Competition — Agreements, decisions and concerted practices — Administrative procedure — Decision ordering an inspection — Plea of illegality against Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 — Right to an effective remedy — Equality of arms — Obligation to state reasons — Right to inviolability of the home — Sufficiently strong evidence — Proportionality)
IO C 414, 30.11.2020, p. 30–31
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
30.11.2020 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 414/30 |
Judgment of the General Court of 5 October 2020 — Casino, Guichard-Perrachon and AMC v Commission
(Case T-249/17) (1)
(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Administrative procedure - Decision ordering an inspection - Plea of illegality against Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Right to an effective remedy - Equality of arms - Obligation to state reasons - Right to inviolability of the home - Sufficiently strong evidence - Proportionality)
(2020/C 414/49)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicants: Casino, Guichard-Perrachon (Saint-Étienne, France) and Achats Marchandises Casino SAS (AMC), formerly EMC Distribution (Vitry-sur-Seine, France) (represented by: D. Théophile, I. Simic, O. de Juvigny, T. Reymond, A. Sunderland and G. Aubron, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin, A. Dawes and I. Rogalski, acting as Agents, and by F. Ninane, lawyer)
Intervener in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: S. Boelaert, S. Petrova and O. Segnana, acting as Agents)
Re:
Application based on Article 263 TFEU, seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 1054 (final) of 9 February 2017 ordering Casino, Guichard-Perrachon and all the companies directly or indirectly controlled by it to submit to an inspection in accordance with Article 20(1) and (4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (Case AT. 40466 — Tute 1).
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls Article 1(b) of Commission Decision C(2017) 1054 (final) of 9 February 2017 ordering Casino, Guichard-Perrachon and all the companies directly or indirectly controlled by it to submit to an inspection in accordance with Article 20(1) and (4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (Case AT.40466 — Tute 1); |
|
2. |
Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
|
3. |
Orders Casino, Guichard-Perrachon and Achats Marchandises Casino SAS (AMC), the European Commission and the Council of the European Union each to bear their own costs. |