Memorandum by BDI (Bundesverband der Deutschen
Industrie)
Thank you very much for the opportunity to present
our views on the proposal by CBI to install an EU Competition
Court. We would like to present comments on the questionnaire
presented by the Sub-Committee of the House of Lords:
1. NEED FOR
ACTION AT
UNION LEVEL
There is a need to amend the current system,
especially with regard to the length of decisions in merger cases
by the Court of first Instance (CFI). Undertakings opting for
a merger are in need of speedy decisions by the EU-Commission
and, if contested, by the CFI. However, even under the "expedited
procedure" of the CFI decisions take often longer than six
months. This is not acceptable for the merging undertakings since
any undue delay endangers the execution of a concentration.
2. REFORM OF
THE CFI
As a first step, a reform of the rules and procedures
of the CFI would be preferable to the establishment of a new Court
since this could avoid the need to erect new structures and would
thus be cost-saving and easier to implement. If possible, the
"expedited procedure" at the CFI should be made more
efficient, especially shorter.
One measure to improve the current structure
and procedures of the CFI could be to introduce a specialized
chamber for competition cases within the CFI. Judges should be
expert judges who only deal with competition matters.
Only if all other means to optimize the work
of the Court of First Instance (CFI) fail a specialised EU Competition
Court should be erected.
In addition, the CFI should hear cases in various
languages or at least also in English and German (not only in
French as it is the case). Translating facilities should be set
up to serve this purpose.
This could help accelerating the pace in merger
cases.
3. JURISDICTION
OF THE
COMPETITION COURT
Not applicable (see Answers 1 and 2)
4. COMPOSITION
OF THE
COMPETITION COURT
Not applicable (see Answers 1 and 2)
5. APPEALS FROM
THE COMPETITION
COURT
Not applicable (see Answers 1 and 2)
6. FUTURE ROLE
OF THE
CFI
Not applicable (see Answers 1 and 2)
2 November 2006
| 
