Skip to content

Estado Português v Banco Privado Português  ∙ Case C-667/13   ∙ Annotation by  Virgílio Pereira and Vojtech Mucha

Annotation on the Judgment of the Court of Justice Second Chamber of 5 March 2015 in Case C-667/13 Estado Português v. Banco Privado Português.

Virgílio Pereira, Vojtech Mucha

The Banco Privado Portugues SA (BPP) case brought to the fore the possibility for the beneficiary to challenge the lawfulness of the European Commission’s decisions on two fronts: by means of an action for annulment before the General Court and via a preliminary ruling. This article starts by assessing whether there is incoherence in case-law. The preliminary ruling is indeed an interesting option for beneficiaries who may want to anticipate the stance taken by the Court of Justice of European Union (CoJ). However this possibility lacks procedural efficiency insofar as the CoJ risks addressing the same issues twice: a feeling of déjà vu will therefore often hover over the CoJ.
Keywords: Procedure before the European Courts, Procedure before National Courts, Procedure before the Commission.

The authors are respectively research director at Magellan – European Affairs Consultancy, Brussels offices and case-handler at the Czech Competition Authority. They are former bluebook trainees, Directorate-General for Competition, European Commission. Leo Flynn, Ulrich Soltész and Jose Luis Buendia Sierra commented on an earlier draft of this paper. Responsibility for the information and views expressed lies entirely with the authors.


Lx-Number Search

(e.g. A | 000123 | 01)

Export Citation