38In the view of the appellants, the General Court’s broad interpretation of paragraph 19 also runs counter to the principle of procedural autonomy, under which, in the absence of EU rules, it is necessary to rely, subject to compliance with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness, on the rules of the domestic legal system of each Member State. According to the appellants, the principle of procedural autonomy precluded, in the present case, the conclusion that the restructuring of the undertakings concerned justified re-allocating the case. Indeed, until the adoption of Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 to empower the competition authorities of the Member States to be more effective enforcers and to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market (OJ 2019 L 11, p. 3), the rules relating to the application of Article 101 TFEU, including those relating to the liability of parent companies and successors, were not harmonised. The proceedings ought therefore to have been conducted on the basis of the German legislation.
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.