Court of Justice 11-12-1973 ECLI:EU:C:1973:151

Facts

By application submitted on 3 August 1973, the ‘Unione Nazionale Consumatori’, (National Union of Italian Consumers), ‘an association not deemed to have legal personality’ within the meaning of Article 36 of the Italian Civil Code, having its registered office in Rome and hereinafter referred to as the ‘Union’, requested permission to intervene in the above Cases in support of the submissions of the Commission, the defendant.

These Cases are concerned with requests for annulment — and, in certain cases, with subsidiary requests for amendment — of Decision No 73/109/EEC of the Commission, of 2 January 1973 (OJ L 140, p. 17 et seq.), which found that the applicants in the main actions and other undertakings were guilty of one or more infringements of Articles 85 or 86 of the EEC Treaty, required them to put an end to such infringement immediately and imposed fines.

All the applicants in the main actions have been accused of concerted practices with the purpose of protecting the Italian market (Article 1, paragraph 1, No 1 of the above-mentioned Decision), and some of them are accused of other infringements.

The Commission submits that the applications in the main actions should be dismissed.

In their observations, submitted on 17 (Cases 45 to 47/73), 18 (Cases 50/73) and 19 September (other Cases), the applicants in the main actions either declare that they refer the matter to the wisdom of the Court (applicants in Cases 41/73, 43/73 and 44/73), or claim that the application to intervene should be dismissed (applicants in the other Cases).

In its observations submitted on 20 September 1973 the Commission states that it has no objection to the admissibility of the application.

Law

1 The Union's application to intervene is concerned with Cases 41/73, 43 to 48/73, 50/73, 111/73, 113/73 and 114/73. The application should be decided by a single Order, in view of the fact that the Union's justification for intervening is identical in all those Cases.

2 Under the terms of Article 37 of the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EEC, the right to intervene in cases before the Court is open, apart from the Member States and institutions of the Community, ‘to any other person establishing an interest in the result’ of such a case.

3 Pursuant to this provision, bodies not having legal personality may be permitted to intervene if they display the characteristics which are at the foundation of such personality, in particular, the ability, however circumscribed, to undertake autonomous action and to assume liability.

4 It is clear from the Statute of the Union that the latter fulfils these requirements.

5 It follows from Article 2 of the said Statute that the Union has as its especial object ‘the representation and protection … of all Italian consumers … in judicial proceedings’, where ‘the interests of the whole category of consumers or of a considerable part of the latter are in issue’, and that it is the Union's intention to ‘contribute to the abolition of obstacles imposed by the market and by institutions upon the free competition of producers and traders and upon the free and conscious choice of consumers’.

6 It appears from the Decree No 930 of the President of the Republic of 12 July 1963 (Ordinary Supplement to the Gazzetta Ufficiale No 188 of 15 July 1963, p. 3 et seq.), and from a Decree of the Minister for Agriculture and Forestry of 21 September 1967 (Gazzetta Ufficiale No 68 of 12 March 1968, p. 1582 to 1583), that the Union or its president are called upon to sit on certain committees convened by the Italian Public Authorities and that therefore it exercises the requisite degree of representation.

7 Since it is the particular objective of the Union to represent and protect consumers, it can show an interest in the correct application of Community provisions in the field of competition, which not only ensure that the common market operates normally but which also tend to favour consumers.

8 Accordingly the Union has an interest in the solution of the Cases at issue, to the extent that the latter concern the finding that the applicants in the main actions indulged in a concerted practice with the object and effect of protecting the Italian market.

9 Accordingly, the intervention must be permitted insofar as it supports the submissions of the Commission with regard to its finding as to the protection of the Italian market.