Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 52005XX0715(01)

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its 379th meeting on 20 September 2004 concerning a preliminary draft decision in Case COMP/C.37 750 — French beer (Text with EEA relevance)

OJ C 175, 15.7.2005, p. 2–2 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

Date of document:
20/09/2004
Author:
Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Form:
Opinion
Additional information:
EEA relevance
Treaty:
Treaty establishing the European Community
Link
Link
Link
Select all documents mentioning this document
Link

15.7.2005   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/2

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions given at its 379th meeting on 20 September 2004 concerning a preliminary draft decision in Case COMP/C.37 750 — French beer

(2005/C 175/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that in this decision it is not necessary to define the relevant market.

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission about the existence of an agreement, within the meaning of Article 81(1) of the Treaty, between Heineken N.V./Heineken France and Danone/Brasseries Kronenbourg.

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement between Heineken N.V./Heineken France and Danone/Brasseries Kronenbourg has as its object the restriction of competition within the meaning of Article 81(1) of the Treaty.

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with Commission on the assessment of the gravity of the infringement, as described in the draft decision.

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission:

(a)

on the aggravating circumstances against Danone/Brasseries Kronenbourg;

(b)

that there are no aggravating circumstances against Heineken N.V./Heineken France.

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission:

(a)

that there are no attenuating circumstances in favour of Danone/Brasseries Kronenbourg;

(b)

that there are no attenuating circumstances in favour of Heineken N.V./Heineken France.

7.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

8.

The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account all the other points raised during the discussion.
Top