Tecno*37 v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico and Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Bologna (C-242/23)

Judgment of 4 Oct 2024

law://eu/cjeu/2023/c-242-23/para_29@2026-11-13

29In that regard, it should be noted that, according to settled case-law, the decision of the Commission to initiate, or not, an infringement procedure amounts to the exercise of a discretion it enjoys, which is not for review by the Court (see, to that effect, judgment of 16 July 2020, Commission v Romania (Anti-money laundering), C‑549/18, EU:C:2020:563, paragraph 49 and the case-law cited). In view of the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties, that institution alone is competent to decide whether it is appropriate to initiate an infringement procedure. It also alone is competent to decide whether it is appropriate to continue the pre-litigation procedure by delivering a reasoned opinion, just as it has the power, but not the duty, on completion of that procedure, to bring an action before the Court for a declaration that the Member State concerned has failed to fulfil its obligations as alleged (judgment of 16 July 2015, Commission v Bulgaria, C‑145/14, EU:C:2015:502, paragraph 24 and the case-law cited).

Tecno*37 v Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico and Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato e Agricoltura di Bologna (C-242/23)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections