Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Commission of the European Communities v T-Mobile Austria GmbH (C-141/02 P)
Judgment
The appeal
The admissibility of the main appeal
Findings of the Court
48

Commission of the European Communities v T-Mobile Austria GmbH (C-141/02 P)

Judgment of 22 Feb 2005law://eu/cjeu/2002/c-141-02/para_48@2026-11-11

48Under the third paragraph of Article 49 of that Statute, the Community institutions do not have to show any interest in order to bring an appeal against a judgment of the Court of First Instance (Commission v Anie Partecipazioni, cited above, paragraph 171).

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Grand Chamber
Case: C-141/02 P · ECLI:EU:C:2005:98
Decided: 22 Feb 2005
Procedure: Action for annulment
Ruled invalid: 61999TJ0054
Applicant: Commission of the European Communities
Defendant: T-Mobile Austria GmbH
Rapporteur: J.-P. Puissochet
Advocate General: M. Poiares Maduro
Bench: 13 judges
V. Skouris, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas, A. Borg Barthet, J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, M. Ilešič, J. Malenovský, J. Klučka, U. Lõhmus
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62002CJ0141

Topics

Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

History · 1 version

22 Feb 2005Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: max.mobil Telekommunikation Service GmbH v Commission of the European Communities (T-54/99)
Cited by 9: Mass Response Service GmbH v European Commission (T-885/16); Multiconnect GmbH v European Commission (T-884/16); 1&1 Telecom GmbH v European Commission (T-43/16); Council of the European Union v Front populaire pour la libération de la saguia-el-hamra et du rio de oro (Front Polisario) (C-104/16 P)2 provisions; Eugène Emile Marie Kimman v European Commission (T-644/11); European Commission and Guido Strack v Guido Strack and European Commission (T-197/11); TV 2/Danmark A/S and Others v Commission of the European Communities (T-309/04); Union française de l’express (UFEX) and Others v Commission of the European Communities (T-60/05)2 provisions; Jacques Wunenburger v European Commission (C-362/05 P)2 provisions
Cites 10: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)8 provisions; Commission of the European Communities and French Republic v Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) (C-302/99 P, C-308/99 P); Commission of the European Communities v Anic Partecipazioni SpA (C-49/92 P); Control Data Belgium NV SA v Commission of the European Communities (294/81); max.mobil Telekommunikation Service GmbH v Commission of the European Communities (T-54/99); Bundesverband der Bilanzbuchhalter e.V. v Commission of the European Communities (C-107/95 P); EEC Council: Regulation No 17: First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty; French Republic v Comafrica SpA and Dole Fresh Fruit Europe Ltd & Co. and Commission of the European Communities (C-73/97 P); Commission of the European Communities and French Republic v Télévision française 1 SA (TF1) (C-302/99); Council of the European Union v Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica GmbH and C. H. Boehringer Sohn (C-23/00 P)