L’obbligo di rinvio pregiudiziale nelle specificità processuali degli Stati membri: la sentenza KUBERA della Corte di giustizia = L’obligation du renvoi préjudiciel dans les spécificités procédurales des États membres : l’arrêt KUBERA de la Cour de justice = The Obligation to Make a Preliminary Reference in the Procedural Rules Specificities of the Member States: the Ruling of the Court of Justice in KUBERA

This article explores the issue of delays in the pre-investigative phase of antitrust proceedings conducted by the Italian Competition Authority (AGCM), focusing on the legal tensions between procedural guarantees and effective enforcement. It analyzes the Caronte case, where the CJEU ruled that the rigid 90-day deadline imposed by Italian administrative courts undermines EU law by restricting enforcement effectiveness and increasing the risk of impunity. The judgment reaffirms the need to balance due process and procedural autonomy with the principle of effectiveness in applying EU competition rules. The article also reflects on the broader implications of the ruling for ongoing cases and the relationship between national and EU legal systems in antitrust enforcement. Antonello Schettino This article explores the issue of delays in the pre-investigative phase of antitrust proceedings conducted by the Italian Competition Authority (AGCM), focusing on the legal tensions between procedural guarantees and effective enforcement. It analyzes the Caronte case, where the CJEU ruled that the rigid 90-day deadline imposed by Italian administrative courts undermines EU law by restricting enforcement effectiveness and increasing the risk of impunity. The judgment reaffirms the need to balance due process and procedural autonomy with the principle of effectiveness in applying EU competition rules. The article also reflects on the broader implications of the ruling for ongoing cases and the relationship between national and EU legal systems in antitrust enforcement. Antonello Schettino

L’articolo analizza il tema procedurale della tardività dell’avvio della fase preistruttoria nei procedimenti antitrust condotti dall’Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), intesa come mancato rispetto di un termine ragionevole. L’analisi si concentra, in particolare, sul caso Caronte, mettendo in luce le tensioni che si possono ingenerare tra le garanzie procedurali – segnatamente, il diritto al giusto procedimento e al rispetto del termine ragionevole – e l’esigenza di effettività nell’applicazione del diritto antitrust UE. Oltre a ripercorrere i principi affermati dalla Corte di giustizia, vengono evidenziate le loro ricadute sistemiche nonché gli eventuali dubbi applicativi che potrebbero insorgere nei contenziosi nazionali sospesi in attesa della sentenza Caronte.