ABSTRACT
The task of the Court under Art 220 EC is to ‘ensure that in the interpretation and application of the Treaty the law is observed’. The Court is the ultimate authority on Community law issues, including competition law. The Court is renowned for its creative techniques of interpretation, partly due to the need to ‘fill the gaps’ in the Treaty. It has been criticised for this judicial activism, which has been obvious in the development of competition law principles from the limited text of the Treaty. In addition to the Court’s judgments, there are the opinions of the Advocates General. An Advocate General is an official with the same status as a Court judge, but their task is to prepare a review of the facts and legal analysis of the issues, together with recommendations for the Court. The Advocate General’s opinion is delivered in advance of the Court’s final deliberations and is important because it is of persuasive effect in both the instant case and later cases, and also because it gives a wider picture of Community competition law development. The opinions tend to look more fully at the background of the case and related developments, and make a comparative assessment of national laws. This contrasts with the typically short and precise judgments of the Court, which give little indication of their rationale or the developments leading to the particular legal analysis. The trend has changed in recent years with longer judgments in competition law cases, particularly by the CFI.
