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
Consiliul Concurenţei v Whiteland Import Export SRL (C-308/19)
Consideration of the questions referred
The second question
63

Consiliul Concurenţei v Whiteland Import Export SRL (C-308/19)

Judgment of 21 Jan 2021law://eu/cjeu/2019/c-308-19/para_63@2026-11-11

63The question whether a national provision must be disapplied in so far as it conflicts with EU law arises only if no interpretation of that provision in conformity with EU law proves possible (judgment of 7 August 2018, Smith, C‑122/17, EU:C:2018:631, paragraph 41).

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Second Chamber
Case: C-308/19 · ECLI:EU:C:2021:47
Decided: 21 Jan 2021
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie (High Court of Cassation and Justice, Romania)
Applicant: Consiliul Concurenţei
Defendant: Whiteland Import Export SRL
Rapporteur: A. Arabadjiev
Advocate General: G. Pitruzzella
Bench: 5 judges
A. Arabadjiev, K. Lenaerts, A. Kumin, T. von Danwitz, P.G. Xuereb
Language: Romanian
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62019CJ0308

Topics

Dominant position Principles of Union law

History · 1 version

21 Jan 2021Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Commission Directive 2003/1/EC of 6 January 2003 adapting to technical progress Annex II to Council Directive 76/768/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products (Text with EEA relevance)
Cited by 16: FY v Profi Credit Polska S.A. w Bielsku Białej (C-582/21); Maersk A/S v Allianz Seguros y Reaseguros SA and Mapfre España Compañía de Seguros y Reaseguros SA v MACS Maritime Carrier Shipping GmbH & Co (C-345/22); LM v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Hartberg-Fürstenfeld (C-219/20); AB Volvo and DAF Trucks NV v RM (C-267/20); Proceedings brought by RS (C-430/21); Napfény-Toll Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-615/21); ASG 2 Ausgleichsgesellschaft für die Sägeindustrie Nordrhein-Westfalen GmbH v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (C-253/23)2 provisions; Trenitalia SpA v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (C-510/23); Caronte & Tourist SpA v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (C-511/23); Imballaggi Piemontesi Srl v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM) (C-588/24); Uniper Global Commodities SE v European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (T-96/23); RWE Supply & Trading GmbH v European Union Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (T-95/23); HSBC Holdings plc and Others v European Commission (T-561/21); Obshtina Svishtov v Rakovoditel na Upravlyavashtia organ na Operativna programa „Regioni v rastezh“ 2014-2020 (C-175/23); Zenith Media Communications SRL v Consiliul Concurenţei (C-385/21); European Commission v Kingdom of Spain (C-278/20)
Cites 19: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)4 provisions; Treaty on European Union (consolidated 2016); Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (Text with EEA relevance); A. K. and Others v Sąd Najwyższy, CP v Sąd Najwyższy and DO v Sąd Najwyższy (C-585/18, C-624/18, C-625/18); Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA (C-106/89); Winner Wetten GmbH v Bürgermeisterin der Stadt Bergheim (C-409/06); FMS and Others v Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság Dél-alföldi Regionális Igazgatóság and Országos Idegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság (C-924/19 PPU, C-925/19 PPU); Criminal proceedings against Nikolay Kolev and Others (C-612/15); Vlaamse federatie van verenigingen van Brood- en Banketbakkers, Ijsbereiders en Chocoladebewerkers (VEBIC) VZW (C-439/08); Pfleiderer AG v Bundeskartellamt (C-360/09); Cogeco Communications Inc v Sport TV Portugal SA and Others (C-637/17); Criminal proceedings against Ognyanov (C-554/14); ThyssenKrupp Nirosta GmbH v European Commission (C-352/09 P); David Smith v Patrick Meade and Others (C-122/17)2 provisions; ITC Innovative Technology Center GmbH v Bundesagentur für Arbeit (C-208/05); Stadt Wiener Neustadt v Niederösterreichische Landesregierung (C-348/15); Joachim Pöpperl v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (C-187/15); Criminal proceedings against José António Batista Morais (C-60/91); Criminal proceedings against Petar Dzivev and Others (C-310/16)