This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52014XX0917(01)
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 17 March 2014 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39610(1) Power Cables — Rapporteur: Denmark
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 17 March 2014 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39610(1) Power Cables — Rapporteur: Denmark
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 17 March 2014 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39610(1) Power Cables — Rapporteur: Denmark
OJ C 319, 17.9.2014, 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)
17.9.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 319/3 |
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 17 March 2014 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39610(1) Power Cables
Rapporteur: Denmark
2014/C 319/03
(1) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practices between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 TFEU. |
(2) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practices. |
(3) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in a single and continuous infringement concerning high voltage underground and submarine power cables within the meaning of Article 101 TFEU. |
(4) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreements and/or concerted practices have as its object the restriction of competition within the meaning of Article 101 TFEU. |
(5) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreements and/or concerted practices have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU. |
(6) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the Commission has territorial jurisdiction to apply Article 101 TFEU. |
(7) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the duration of the infringement (1). |
(8) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission draft decision as regards the addressees of the decision. |
(9) |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision. |
(10) |
The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
(1) Following the clarifications provided by the Commission during the second Advisory Committee one Member State competition authority withdrew its earlier abstention regarding question 7.