Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
United Kingdom Competition Appeals Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Competition Appeals Tribunal >> Deutsche Bahn AG v Morgan Advanced Materials Plc [2013] CAT 19 (27 August 2013)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/CAT/2013/19.html
Cite as: [2013] CAT 19
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
- The Application be granted and any application for permission to appeal the Ruling be filed and served by not later than 5pm on 6 September 2013.
- There be liberty to apply.
Case No: 1173/5/7/10
Neutral Citation: [2013] CAT 19
IN THE COMPETITION
APPEAL TRIBUNAL
Date: 27 August 2013
(10) DB BAHNBAU GRUPPE GMBH
Claimants
(1) MORGAN ADVANCED MATERIALS PLC (formerly MORGAN CRUCIBLE COMPANY PLC)
(2) SCHUNK GMBH
(3) SCHUNK KOHLENSTOFFTECHNIK GMBH
(4) SGL CARBON SE (formerly SGL CARBON AG)
(5) MERSEN SA (formerly LE CARBONE-LORRAINE SA)
(6) HOFFMANN & CO ELEKTROKOHLE AG
Defendants
UPON the Thirteenth to Seventeenth Claimants (the "UK Claimants") applying on 13 June 2013 to lift the stay in respect of their claims as against the Second to Sixth Defendants (the "Defendants")
AND UPON the Tribunal granting the UK Claimants' application by its Ruling ([2013] CAT 18) dated 15 August 2013 (the "Ruling") for the reasons given therein
AND UPON the Tribunal abridging the period for seeking permission to appeal the Ruling (see paragraph 96(2) of the Ruling)
AND UPON the Defendants applying on 22 August 2013 (the "Application") for a one week extension to the period for applying for permission to appeal the Ruling, on the basis that (i) summer vacation is posing difficulties for the Defendants and their counsel and (ii) a one week extension will cause the UK Claimants no real prejudice
AND UPON the UK Claimants informing the Tribunal on 23 August 2013 that they oppose the Application and consider the abridgement of time appropriate for the reasons given by the Tribunal at paragraph 95 of the Ruling
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
REASONS
The Tribunal was, and remains, of the view that a considerable amount of the work for any permission application will already have been carried out, given the detailed submissions we received in advance of handing down the Ruling. Although I note the UK Claimants' opposition to the Application, little prejudice will be caused by a short extension for the period sought and I recognise that the vacation period can cause difficulties for the parties with availability of their advisors. Accordingly, the short extension sought is granted.
| Marcus Smith QC | Made: 27 August 2013 |
| Chairman of the Competition Appeal Tribunal | Drawn: 27 August 2013 |