EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52013XX0928(01)
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions given at its meeting of 5 July 2013 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.39748 — Automotive wire harnesses — Rapporteur: Spain
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions given at its meeting of 5 July 2013 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.39748 — Automotive wire harnesses — Rapporteur: Spain
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions given at its meeting of 5 July 2013 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.39748 — Automotive wire harnesses — Rapporteur: Spain
OJ C 283, 28.9.2013, p. 3–3
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
28.9.2013 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 283/3 |
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant positions given at its meeting of 5 July 2013 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.39748 — Automotive wire harnesses
Rapporteur: Spain
2013/C 283/03
1. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practice between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA in the case of each of the following infringements: (a) the Toyota infringement; (b) the Honda infringement; (c) the Nissan infringement; (d) the Renault I infringement; and (e) the Renault II infringement. |
2. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practice contained in the draft decision in the case of each of the five infringements. |
3. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU in the case of (a) the Toyota infringement and (b) the Honda infringement. |
4. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practice was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU in the case of each of the five infringements. |
5. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practice have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU in the case of each of the five infringements. |
6. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's assessment as regards the duration of the infringements. |
7. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's draft decision as regards the addressees. |
8. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision. |
9. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003. |
10. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines. |
11. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fines. |
12. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no aggravating and no mitigating circumstances applicable in this case. |
13. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2006 Leniency Notice. |
14. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2008 Settlement Notice. |
15. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines. |
16. |
The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |