Conex Banninger Ltd v The European Commission

Conex Banninger Ltd v The European Commission

The court declined to refer questions to the ECJ, holding that the declarations sought would likely conflict with the Commission's pending investigation, that EU law does not require judicial protection against preparatory acts, and that the ECJ is unlikely to entertain a reference on such matters; the application was dismissed in the exercise of judicial discretion.

Parties
Claimant: Conex Banninger Limited; Defendant: European Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Declaratory Action / Application for Reference to ECJ Prior to Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Successor Liability, Declaratory Relief, Jurisdiction of National Courts, Effective Judicial Protection, Preliminary Reference Procedure
Competition Law European Union Law Insolvency Law Successor Liability Declaratory Relief Jurisdiction of National Courts Effective Judicial Protection Preliminary Reference Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Conex Banninger Limited

Claimant

European Commission

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Declaratory Action / Application for Reference to ECJ Prior to Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Conex can be made liable for fines imposed on IBP Limited and IBP France SA under Article 101 TFEU
  2. 2 Whether national courts can grant declaratory relief against the Commission during a pending competition investigation
  3. 3 Whether EU law requires national courts to provide effective judicial protection against preparatory acts of EU institutions

Ratio Decidendi

The court declined to refer questions to the ECJ, holding that the declarations sought would likely conflict with the Commission's pending investigation, that EU law does not require judicial protection against preparatory acts, and that the ECJ is unlikely to entertain a reference on such matters; the application was dismissed in the exercise of judicial discretion.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for reference to the ECJ is dismissed