COURT OF JUSTICE : MAIN CASES.

A selection of cases before the Court of Justice and Court of First Instance during the week of 5-9 October.

Tuesday 6 October

- Several competition rulings: Joined Cases C-501/06 P GlaxoSmithKline Services v Commission, C-513/06 P Commission v GlaxoSmithKline, C-515/06 P European Association of Euro Pharmaceutical Companies v GlaxoSmithKline C-519/06 P Asociacion de exportadores espanoles de productos farmaceuticos v GlaxoSmithKline.

To prevent parallel trade, GlaxoSmithKline's general sales conditions of 1998 establish for certain medicines export prices that are higher than prices prevailing in Spain. The Commission ruled that the company was restricting competition and refused to grant the exemption it had sought. The Court of First Instance subsequently annulled the Commission's decision refusing the exemption (Case T-168/01). It maintained that the measures had not been sufficiently analysed as a factor of innovation, which is preponderant in the pharmaceuticals sector. This point was the focus of the applications for annulment of the Commission's decision submitted by Aseprofar and EAEPC. The CFI nevertheless confirmed the Commission's decision that the general sales conditions infringe EU competition law on cartels by preventing a decrease in medicine prices. GlaxoSmithKline Services disputes this analysis in case C-501/06 P. Advocate-general's conclusions: The advocate-general proposes to confirm the CFI's ruling: the agreement restricts competition and the Commission should review again whether the restrictive general sales conditions are entitled to an exemption from competition rules because they can help promote technical progress.

- Judgement C-123/08 Wolzenburg. Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. The application for a preliminary ruling submitted by Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) concerns interpretation of the Council's framework decision of 13 June 2002. The decision provides that, under certain conditions, the member states are entitled to refuse to execute arrest warrants. Dutch legislation authorises differentiated treatment of individuals based on whether they are a Dutch national or not (less favourable conditions). The Dutch court that was asked to execute a European arrest warrant against Mr Wolzenburg questions the compatibility of this legislation with the principles of equal treatment and European citizenship. Advocate-general's conclusions: The Dutch legislation infringes the principle of...