Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62014CN0345

Case C-345/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 17 July 2014  — SIA ‘Maxima Latvija’ v Konkurences padome

OJ C 329, 22.9.2014, p. 4–5 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

22.9.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/4


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Latvia) lodged on 17 July 2014 — SIA ‘Maxima Latvija’ v Konkurences padome

(Case C-345/14)

2014/C 329/06

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SIA ‘Maxima Latvija’

Defendant: Konkurences padome

Questions referred

1.

Can the agreement under consideration in the present case, concluded by a lessor of commercial premises and a retailer (the ‘anchor tenant’), which restricts the lessor’s right to decide individually, without the consent of the anchor tenant, to make other lettings of commercial premises to potential competitors of the ‘anchor tenant’, be regarded as an agreement between undertakings whose object is the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition, for the purposes of Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union?

2.

When the compatibility of the agreement with Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union is assessed, must an analysis be made of the structure of the market, and if so, for what purpose?

3.

Is the market power of the parties to the agreement under consideration in the present case, and its possible growth, a factor that must necessarily be taken into account when the compatibility of the agreement with Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union is assessed?

4.

If, in order to discover the nature of the agreement and to ascertain that the elements of a prohibited agreement are present, it is necessary to determine whether the agreement could possibly affect the market, can such potential effects on the market at the same time form a sufficient basis for finding that the agreement corresponds to the definition of a prohibited agreement, without any need for it to be determined whether that agreement actually produced any adverse effects?


Top