EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 52015XX0228(01)
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 17 October 2014 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.39924 — Swiss Franc Interest Rate Derivatives (CHF LIBOR) — Rapporteur: Netherlands
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 17 October 2014 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.39924 — Swiss Franc Interest Rate Derivatives (CHF LIBOR) — Rapporteur: Netherlands
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 17 October 2014 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.39924 — Swiss Franc Interest Rate Derivatives (CHF LIBOR) — Rapporteur: Netherlands
OJ C 72, 28.2.2015, p. 7–7
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
28.2.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 72/7 |
Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 17 October 2014 concerning a preliminary draft decision relating to Case AT.39924 — Swiss Franc Interest Rate Derivatives
(CHF LIBOR)
Rapporteur: Netherlands
(2015/C 72/05)
|
1. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the two draft decisions constitutes agreements and/or concerted practices between relevant undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA. |
|
2. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreements and/or concerted practices contained in the two draft decisions. |
|
3. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the two draft decisions have participated in that infringement/those infringements as described in the two draft decisions. |
|
4. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreements and/or concerted practices for the two infringements described in the two draft decisions was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 EEA. |
|
5. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreements and/or concerted practices described in the two draft decisions have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU. |
|
6. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration for the infringements described in the two draft decisions. |
|
7. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the addressees of the two draft decisions. |
|
8. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that fines should be imposed on the addressees of the two draft decisions. |
|
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 for the two draft decisions. |
|
10. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines for the two draft decisions. |
|
11. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fines for the two decisions. |
|
12. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reductions of the fines based on the 2006 Leniency Notice for the two draft decisions. |
|
13. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2008 Settlement Notice for the two decisions. |
|
14. |
The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines for the two decisions. |
|
15. |
The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |