Tag Archives: Documents for Publication

Publish Selection

Leave a reply

Publish Selection

Identifying information that may not be published

In order to identify confidential information, correspondence and contacts with the addressees of decisions are necessary.

More about Publish Selection

Under Article 16(3) of Regulation No 773/2004, the addressees may be required, within a deadline set by the Commission: – to identify any part of that decision which in their view contains business secrets and other confidential information; – to substantiate each claim for confidentiality; – to provide the Commission with a non-confidential version of the decision in which the confidential passages are deleted; – to provide a concise description of each piece of deleted information. – If the parties fail to comply with these requirements, the Commission may assume that the decision does not contain confidential information (Article 16(4) of the Reg.773/2004).

More about the Subject

The case team should take a position as to whether the confidentiality claims of the parties are justified and follow up with the parties accordingly (see further section 4.1.4).

Resources

See Also

References

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

Further Reading

  • Information about Publish Selection in EU Competition Procedure, 3rd. Edition, Edited by Luis Ortiz Blanco (Oxford University Press)

Request for deadline extension

Leave a reply

Request for deadline extension

Identifying information that may not be published: Request for deadline extension

In case of a request for an extension of the deadline: – Such a request must be in writing (e-mail is sufficient). – The request must be reasoned to allow for its appropriate assessment by the case team. – In general, the need to prepare, at the same time, for a procedure before the Court (appeal, preparation for a hearing) is not an acceptable reason for an extension, since this applies to all parties. – In general, a justified extension should not exceed one week, however, account should be taken of the length of the decision, which in certain circumstances may justify a longer extension. – The reply to the extension request should be in writing (e-mail by the case team is sufficient).

Resources

See Also

References

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

Further Reading

  • Information about Request for deadline extension in EU Competition Procedure, 3rd. Edition, Edited by Luis Ortiz Blanco (Oxford University Press)

Disputes over confidentiality claims

Leave a reply

Disputes over confidentiality claims

Disputes over confidentiality claims not settled – involvement of the Hearing Officer

Where a disagreement over confidentiality claims cannot be resolved: – The relevant addressee(s) are informed by a letter signed by a Head of Unit or case manager of those confidentiality claims that are not considered to be justified, the reasons thereof 1 and of the fact that: – they may address themselves, within a reasonable deadline to be set in view of the circumstances of the case (in some cases one week may be appropriate), to the Hearing Officer, who can decide on the disputed confidentiality claims 2 , and, – if they fail to address the Hearing Officer within the given deadline, the relevant confidentiality claims are considered to be withdrawn and the relevant information covered by those claims will be published.

More about Disputes over confidentiality claims

If the Hearing Officer is addressed within the given deadline: – The relevant procedure regarding the involvement of the Hearing Officer – pursuant to Article 8 of the Terms of Reference applies – In case the Hearing Officer is involved, a provisional version of the decision without the disputed parts will be published on the website. – The final non-confidential version will be disclosed on the date specified in the reasoned decision of the Hearing Officer notified to the provider of information, unless the addressee(s) brings an action against the Hearing Officer's decision before the General Court and makes a request for interim relief to the Court to suspend the effect of that decision.

Resources

See Also

References

  • Information about Disputes over confidentiality claims in the Antitrust Manual of Procedures for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (Internal DG Competition)

Notes


[Note 1] See Article 8(1) of the Hearing Officer Terms of Reference.
[Note 2] See Article 8 of the Hearing Officer Terms of Reference.

Further Reading

  • Information about Disputes over confidentiality claims in “An Introduction to EU Competition Law”, Moritz Lorenz (Cambridge University Press)

First letter to the addressees

Leave a reply

First letter to the addressees

First letter to the addressees

Without undue delay after the adoption of the decision by the Commission, all parties receive a letter signed by the case manager or Head of Unit.

More about First letter to the addressees

In this letter, the addressees are requested to confirm that – the summary of the decision, – the final report of the Hearing Officer, and – the opinion of the Advisory Committee do not contain any confidential information, and, in particular, no business secrets.

More about the Subject

They are furthermore requested to – provide a complete non-confidential version of the decision that has been addressed to them. This means that they will have to identify any confidential information in the decision that has been addressed to them (by highlighting – and not blanking out – the relevant parts in the entire decision), – to substantiate their confidentiality claims for each piece of information claimed to be confidential, and – to provide a concise summary of each piece of deleted information. In this letter, the addressees will be reminded that confidential information refers, in particular, to • business secrets (see section 6.1 ), and • information that the addressee submitted under the Leniency Notice (see section 6.3).

Other Considerations

The summary of the decision should be attached to the letter in paper or “.pdf” format.

More

The deadline for the reply is usually two weeks starting from the day the first Commission letter was received.

More

This letter indicates that in accordance with Article 16(4) of Regulation 773/2004 in absence of a reply the Commission will consider that none of the documents in question contain confidential information. Note: Whereas the summary, the final report of the Hearing Officer and the opinion of the Advisory Committee are unlikely to contain confidential information, the decision notified to the addressees ('confidential version') will contain such information.

Resources

See Also

References

  • Information about First letter to the addressees in the Antitrust Manual of Procedures for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (Internal DG Competition)

Further Reading

  • Information about First letter to the addressees in EU Competition Procedure, 3rd. Edition, Edited by Luis Ortiz Blanco (Oxford University Press)

Follow-up in case of non-reply

Leave a reply

Follow-up in case of non-reply

Follow-up in case of non-reply

In case the parties do not reply within the deadline (taking account of possible extensions): – The case manager may follow this up with the parties informally. – Otherwise or if the informal follow-up is unsuccessful, the parties will receive a reminder letter. • For the details of the request, the reminder letter refers back to the first letter. • It indicates that the original (or extended) deadline has not been met. • It sets a new deadline of 48 hours for reply. • It indicates that should the addressee fail to reply within the new deadline, the Commission will publish the decision, assuming that it does not contain confidential information in accordance with Article 16(4) of the Reg.773/2004. • In case the decision contains information that is, in the view of the case team, obviously confidential with respect to that addressee, the reminder letter also (i) indicates this information, and (ii) invites the addressee to specifically consider its position with respect to this information. • This letter is signed by the Head of Unit or the case manager.

More about Follow-up in case of non-reply

The next step to be taken depends on the reaction of the parties: – Should there be no reaction by the parties within the new deadline, the documents can be published in line with Article 16(4) of Regulation 773/2004. However, the case team should delete information that is, in the view of the case team, obviously confidential. 1 . – Should the parties reply with confidentiality claims within the new deadline, the following steps apply.

Resources

See Also

References

  • Information about Follow-up in case of non-reply in the Antitrust Manual of Procedures for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (Internal DG Competition)

Notes


[Note 1] Article 16(4) of the Reg.773/2004 does not oblige the Commission to leave obviously confidential information in the public version: 'If undertakings […] fail to comply […], the Commission may assume that the documents or statements concerned do not contain confidential information.' (Emphasis added).

Further Reading

  • Information about Follow-up in case of non-reply in “An Introduction to EU Competition Law”, Moritz Lorenz (Cambridge University Press)

Confidentiality claims acceptable

Leave a reply

Confidentiality claims acceptable

Confidentiality claims acceptable

Where the addressees make confidentiality claims (either in response to the first or to the reminder letter), the case team will have to assess these and decide whether to accept them or not.

More about Confidentiality claims acceptable

If the case team accepts all confidentiality claims, it prepares a consolidated version of the decision and takes all the necessary steps for the publication on the website (see 5).

Resources

See Also

References

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

Further Reading

  • Information about Confidentiality claims acceptable in EU Competition Procedure, 3rd. Edition, Edited by Luis Ortiz Blanco (Oxford University Press)

Confidentiality claims not acceptable

Leave a reply

Confidentiality claims not acceptable

Confidentiality claims not acceptable

It is for the case team to determine whether any of the confidentiality claims are justified on the basis of substantiated reasons provided by the parties, in line with the substantive requirements detailed in section 6 below.

More about Confidentiality claims not acceptable

Disagreements on confidentiality claims with the parties should usually not arise for the documents to be published in the OJ (summary of the decision, final report of the Hearing Officer and opinion of the Advisory Committee), which generally do not contain confidential information. Such disagreements, however, may occur when establishing the non-confidential version of the decision for publication on the website.

More about the Subject

In case of a disagreement with any party on confidentiality issues, the case team informs the party of its disagreement with a view to obtaining the agreement of all parties on a version that is acceptable to the Commission.

Other Considerations

Initially this can be done informally, though it should be done in writing and reasoned. A deadline should be set for the party to submit any written comments. An e-mail by the case handler suffices.

Resources

See Also

References

  • Information about Confidentiality claims not acceptable in the Antitrust Manual of Procedures for the application of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU (Internal DG Competition)

Further Reading

  • Information about Confidentiality claims not acceptable in EU Competition Procedure, 3rd. Edition, Edited by Luis Ortiz Blanco (Oxford University Press)