Letter of facts

Letter of facts

New Facts after Statement of Objections: Letter of facts

On the other hand, if new information only corroborates the objections already raised against the undertaking(s), i.e. if further evidence is brought forward in support of the objections already set out in the SO, it is sufficient to bring them to the attention of the parties by a simple letter (letter of facts), giving them a possibility to provide written comments on the new evidence within a fixed deadline 1 . Parties may ask for an extension of this deadline by first submitting a request in due time within the original deadline to the case team. In case of refusal or disagreement about the length of the extension, the matter can be referred to the Hearing Officer, by means of a reasoned request. 2

More about Letter of facts

Where, for instance, there is a new complaint containing facts other than those already communicated, but that corroborate the objections already communicated to the undertaking, a supplementary SO is not formally necessary; it is sufficient that the undertaking in question be informed of the contents of such complaint and that its reaction be recorded in writing. 3 Similarly, where the conclusions drawn earlier in the SO will not be altered, the Commission may forward evidential documents to the undertakings so that they may make their observations on them. 4 This ensures that the parties will be given due access to the file, without, however, the necessity to organise a new hearing. When the Commission merely communicates to a party a non-confidential version (or specific excerpts thereof) of the other parties' written replies to the Statement of Objections and gives it the opportunity to submit their comments (see above), this does not constitute a letter of facts.


See Also


  • Information about Letter of facts in the Antitrust Manual of Procedures for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (Internal DG Competition)


[Note 1]
Case T-23/99 LR af 1998 v Commission [2002] ECR II-1705, paragraphs 188-190, Case T-340/03 France Télécom v Commission [2007] ECR II-107, paragraphs 28-37 and Best Practices Notice, paragraph 110; see also Commission Report on Competition Policy [2004], SEC (2005) 805 final, 10 in relation to Commission Decision COMP/C-3/37.792 of 24.3.2004, Microsoft, paragraph 15.
[Note 2]
Article 3(7) of the Hearing Officer Terms of Reference.
[Note 3]
Joined Cases 209-215 and 218/78 Van Landewijck e.a [1980] ECR 3243, paragraphs 29-35.
[Note 4]
Joined Cases T-236/01, T-239/01, T-244/01-T-246/01, T-251/01 and T-252/01 Tokai Carbon Co Ltd and others v Commission [2004] ECR II-1181, paragraph 45.

Further Reading

  • Information about Letter of facts in “An Introduction to EU Competition Law”, Moritz Lorenz (Cambridge University Press)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *