184In the applicants’ view, the length of those stages is unjustifiable in the light of the case-law:– in the case which gave rise to the judgment of 16 June 2011, Bavaria v Commission (T‑235/07, EU:T:2011:283, paragraph 323), in which the second stage of the administrative procedure lasting 20 months, from receipt of the statement of objections to the adoption of the contested decision in that case, was deemed unreasonable;– in the case which gave rise to the judgment of 15 October 2002, Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij and Others v Commission (C‑238/99 P, C‑244/99 P, C‑245/99 P, C‑247/99 P, C‑250/99 P to C‑252/99 P and C‑254/99 P, EU:C:2002:582), in which the re-adoption procedure lasted only ten months;– furthermore, the re-adoption procedure lasted less than eight months in the case of Solvay v Commission (Opinion of Advocate General Kokott in Solvay v Commission, C‑109/10 P, EU:C:2011:256, point 242), nine months in the case which gave rise to the judgment of 8 May 2014, Bolloré v Commission (C‑414/12 P, EU:C:2014:301), three months in the case which gave rise to the judgment of 12 February 2019, Printeos v Commission (T‑201/17, EU:T:2019:81), and four months in the case which gave rise to the judgment of 18 October 2018, GEA Group v Commission (T‑640/16, EU:T:2018:700).
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.