Reports of Cases

2006 I-11125

Subject-matter

Interpretation of Article 81 EC – Compatibility with the common market of an agreement setting up a system for the exchange of information between financial institutions concerning their clients' solvency – Beneficial effects for consumers and users of financial services – Possibility of Member States granting an exemption.

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• EEC Treaty (Rome), Article 85 : paragraph 19
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 : paragraphs 1 - 72
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P1 : paragraphs 3, 28, 31, 33, 43, 45, 48, 50, 57, 61, 64, 67, 72
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P3 : paragraphs 3, 26, 64 - 66, 70, 72
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 234 : paragraphs 14, 15
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03P1 : paragraph 4
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03P2 : paragraph 4
• Regulation 1/2003 -C4 : paragraph 3
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/64 : paragraph 38
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -5/69 : paragraph 50
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -22/71 : paragraph 34
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -8/72 : paragraph 37
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -19/77 : paragraph 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -43/82 : paragraph 65
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -42/84 : paragraphs 34, 65
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -246/86 : paragraph 37
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -10/92 : paragraph 14
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -49/92 : paragraphs 32, 52, 53
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -250/92 : paragraph 49
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -393/92 : paragraph 35
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -399/93 : paragraph 49
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -415/93 : paragraphs 15, 17
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/95 : paragraphs 50, 51, 53
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -219/95 : paragraph 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -176/96 : paragraph 23
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -215/96 : paragraphs 35, 43, 50
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -306/96 : paragraphs 34, 49
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/97 : paragraph 20
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -435/97 : paragraph 14
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -194/99 : paragraphs 51, 53, 58
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -475/99 : paragraph 34
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -79/01 : paragraph 40
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -359/01 : paragraph 35
• Court of Justice - Order C -190/02 : paragraph 23
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -144/04 : paragraph 16
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -295/04 : paragraphs 15, 16, 33, 34, 36, 37, 40
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -344/04 : paragraph 17

Operative part

• Interprets : EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P1
• Interprets : EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P3

Opinion

• EEC Treaty (Rome), Article 85 : point 22
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 : points 1 - 64
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P1 : points 2, 4, 31, 35, 37, 59, 64
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 81 -P3 : points 4, 57, 60, 61
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 82 : points 4, 28
  
• Regulation 1/2003 : points 4, 26, 28, 29, 59
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03P1 : point 5
  
• Regulation 1/2003 -A03P2 : points 5, 28
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -56/65 : points 35, 36
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -14/68 : point 28
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -5/69 : points 34, 36
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -19/77 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -99/79 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -42/84 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -45/85 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -246/86 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -234/89 : points 35, 36
  
• General Court - Judgment T -35/92 : point 40
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -49/92 : point 37
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -250/92 : point 36
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -399/93 : point 36
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/95 : points 37, 40
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -7/97 : points 20, 30
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -194/99 : points 40, 43
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -309/99 : point 34
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -344/04 : point 20
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

• 30/05/2005

Date of the Opinion

• 29/06/2006

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

23/11/2006

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 205 from 20.08.2005, p.7

Name of the parties

ASNEF-EQUIFAX

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Stappert, Holger ; Esser-Wellié, Michael: Vereinbarkeit eines gegen Entgelt zugänglichen Kreditauskunftsregisters mit dem Kartellverbot, Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2006 p.758-760 (DE)
2. Idot, Laurence: Échanges d'informations, Europe 2007 Janvier Comm. nº 23 p.19-20 (FR)
3. Belhadj, E.: Informatie-uitwisseling: recent arrest bevestigt reeds ingezette lijn, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2007 p.103-107 (NL)
4. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2007 nº 227 (NL)
5. Venayre, Florent: Échanges d'informations sur la solvabilité des emprunteurs, Revue Lamy de la Concurrence : droit, économie, régulation 2007 nº 11 p.26-27 (FR)
6. Meulman, J.: S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2007 p.358-360 (NL)
7. Langer, J.: Asnef: informatie-uitwisseling tussen concurrenten en tussenstaatse handelsbeïnvloeding, Actualiteiten mededingingsrecht 2007 p.113-116 (NL)
8. Nihoul, Paul: "Asnef": La licéité d'accords bancaires visant à partager des informations financières sur des candidats emprunteurs, Revue européenne de droit de la consommation 2007-08 p.310-316 (FR)
9. Inglezakis, I.: Zitimata antagonismou kata ti leitourgia enos systimatos antallagis pliroforion schetikon me ti ferengiotita ton pistolipton metaxy pistotikon idrymaton, Armenopoulos 2008 p.802-810 (EL)
10. Bahr, Christian: Der Unternehmer zwischen Markttransparenz und Geheimwettbewerb - kartellrechtliche Beschränkungen der Unternehmerfreiheit, Bitburger Gespräche in München - Band 5 (Ed. Mohr Siebeck - Tübingen) 2015 p.45-53 (DE)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Tribunal Supremo - Spain

Subject-matter

• Competition
  
• - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
  
• - Concerted practices
  

Provisions of national law referred to

Ley 16/1989, de 17 de julio, de Defensa de la Competencia, de 17/07/1989, de defensa de la competencia, art. 1 et 3

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

• Reference for a preliminary ruling
  

Formation of the Court

troisième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Ó Caoimh

Advocate General

Geelhoed

Language(s) of the Case

• Spanish
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• French