Concept of AKZO procedure provided by the “Glossary of terms used in EU competition policy” (Antitrust and control of concentrations, published in 2002): Procedural rule established by the European Court of Justice which has also been inserted into the mandate of the hearing officer and which concerns the disclosure of confidential documents or business information by the Commission. This rule says that where the Commission intends to disclose information while the company providing it wants this information to be treated as commercially sensitive (business secret or other confidential information), the Commission shall inform that company in writing of its intention and the reasons for it. Where the company concerned still objects to the disclosure of such information, but the Commission finds that the information is not protected and may therefore be disclosed, that finding shall be stated in a reasoned decision. This decision has to be notified to the company concerned, which must be given the oppor-tunity to bring its case before the European Court of First Instance with a view to having the Commission's assessments reviewed. The information may not be disclosed before one week after the decision has been notified.<\/p>\n
(See: Judgment of the European Court of Justice of 24 June 1986 in Case 53\/85 AKZO Chemie BV and AKZO Chemie UK Ltd v Commission, [1986] ECR, p. 1965, paragraph 29; Article 9 of Commission decision of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of hearing officers in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21).)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
AKZO procedure in the European Union LawConcept of AKZO procedure provided by the "Glossary of terms used in EU competition policy" (Antitrust and control of concentrations, published in 2002): Procedural rule established by the European Court of Justice which has also been inserted […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2390,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,196],"tags":[213],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/507"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2390"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=507"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/507\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=507"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=507"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/competition.lawlegal.eu\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=507"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}