Point of law: the meaning of the requirement that a request of the antitrust body to submit documents should be “reasoned”.

Alternative attitudes: 1) such request should contain concrete questions that arose in the course of examination of cases, for the solution of which the antitrust body needs the information requested; or 2) the request is sufficiently reasoned if it is clear from it that the requested documents are necessary for consideration of a certain case, that is, a reference to particular case would suffice.

Ratio decidendi: the second approach is legally correct.

Practical consequences: the Judgment does not provide for the possibility to reverse  inconsistent court decisions in prior analogous cases by virtue of Art 311 of the Commercial Procedure Code. Therefore, its ratio decidendi has only prospective force.