Ο πρόεδρος του Γενικού Δικαστηρίου απορρίπτει την αίτηση της Credit Agricole και της JPMorgan
Chase να εμποδίσει τη δημοσίευση της απόφασης της Επιτροπής σχετικά με την
EURIBOR
General Court of the European Union
PRESS RELEASE No 163/18
Luxembourg, 25 October 2018
Orders of the President of the General Court in Cases T-419/18 R
Crédit agricole and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v
Commission and T-420/18 R JPMorgan Chase and Others v Commission
The President of the General Court rejects the application of Crédit agricole and
JPMorgan Chase to prevent publication of the Commission decision regarding the
EURIBOR cartel
The banks claimed that the entirety of the description of the infringing conduct had to be
concealed, or even that the Commission had to refrain from any publication of that decision
By decision of 7 December 20161
, not yet published, the European Commission imposed fines
amounting to €485 million on Crédit agricole, JP Morgan Chase and on another bank for their
participation in a cartel relating to Euro Interest Rate Derivatives (EURIBOR). The banks colluded
with respect to elements of the price of derivatives and exchanged sensitive information in breach
of EU rules on anti-competitive practices.
Crédit agricole and JPMorgan Chase challenged that decision before the General Court; the
procedure is ongoing (Cases T-113/17 and T-106/17).
At the same time, Crédit agricole and JPMorgan Chase entered into discussion with the
Commission concerning the publication of that decision in order to identify confidential information
which should not be included in the published decision.
Crédit agricole claimed, in particular, that the Commission had to conceal the entirety of the
description of its infringing conduct pending a ruling from the Courts of the EU on its action in Case
T-113/17. As for JP Morgan Chase, it claimed that the Commission had to refrain from any
publication of the decision pending a ruling from the Courts of the EU on its action in Case
T-106/17.
By decisions of 27 April 20182
, the Commission rejected, in essence, the requests for
confidentiality.
Crédit agricole and JPMorgan Chase brought actions for annulment before the General Court
against those decisions (Cases T-419/18 and T-420/18) and, at the same time, submitted
applications for interim measures seeking suspension of the operation of those decisions and, in
essence, for the Commission decision finding the cartel not to be published until the end of the
proceedings for annulment of that decision.
In its orders of today, the President of the General Court rejects the applications for interim
measures.
He notes first that interim measures may be ordered only if the applicants’ arguments do not
appear to be unfounded. Concerning interim protection for confidential information, it does not
1 Commission Decision C(2060) 8530 final of 7 December 2016 relating to a proceeding under Article 101
[TFEU] and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area [Case AT.39914 – Euro Interest
Rate Derivatives (EUIRD)].
2 Commission Decision C(2018) 2743 final of 27 April 2018 concerning objections to the disclosure of
information and Commission Decision C(2018) 2745 final of 27 April 2018 concerning objections to the
disclosure of information.
www.curia.europa.eu
suffice to maintain that that information is of a confidential nature. It is necessary to establish
whether it can be claimed, prima facie, that the information is actually of a confidential nature.
The President of the General Court notes next that the interest that an undertaking, on which the
Commission has imposed a fine for a breach of competition law, has in the details of the infringing
conduct alleged against it not being divulged to the public does not justify any particular protection,
in view of the public interest in knowing as fully as possible the reasons for any Commission action.
Moreover, a balance must be struck between the need to publish a decision finding an
infringement in order to furnish victims of the infringement with evidence to obtain compensation
and the need to protect professional secrecy or trade secrets.
The President of the General Court points out that the applicants’ arguments that the principle of
presumption of innocence precludes any publication of the decision finding an infringement or
requires the whole of the description of the infringing conduct to be concealed, cannot, prima facie,
succeed. He notes that the acts of the EU institutions enjoy a presumption of legality and produce
legal effects so long as they have not been withdrawn, annulled or declared invalid.
Therefore, the President of the General Court finds that there are no grounds, prima facie,
for the applications brought by the banks relating to confidential treatment and thus rejects
the applications for interim measures.
NOTE: The General Court will deliver final judgment on the substance of this case at a later date. An order
as to interim measures is without prejudice to the outcome of the main proceedings. An appeal, limited to
points of law only, may be brought before the President of the Court of Justice against the decision of the
President of the General Court within two months of notification of the decision.
Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the General Court.
The full text T-419/18 R & T-420/18 R of the orders are published on the CURIA website.
Press contact: (+352) 4303 3355
