EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 61982CJ0086

Tuomion tiivistelmä

Keywords
Summary

Keywords

1 . MEASURES ADOPTED BY THE INSTITUTIONS - STATEMENT OF REASONS - OBLIGATION TO GIVE - SCOPE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 190 )

2 . COMPETITION - AGREEMENTS , DECISIONS AND CONCERTED PRACTICES - EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENTS - BLOCK EXEMPTION - SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT NOT CONTAINING A PROHIBITION ON EXPORTS - CONCERTED PRACTICE - RESTRICTION OF PARALLEL IMPORTS - BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION - NONE

( REGULATION NO 67/67/EEC OF THE COMMISSION , ARTS . 1 AND 3 )

3 . COMPETITION - AGREEMENTS , DECISIONS AND CONCERTED PRACTICES - SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM - PROHIBITION OF SALES BETWEEN AUTHORIZED DEALERS - UNLAWFUL CLAUSE

( EEC TREATY , ART . 85 ( 1 ))

4 . COMPETITION - AGREEMENTS , DECISIONS AND CONCERTED PRACTICES - SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM - CLAUSE PERMITTING THE PROHIBITION OF DEALERS ' ADVERTISEMENTS - PROHIBITION

( EEC TREATY , ART . 85 ( 1 ))

5 . COMPETITION - AGREEMENTS , DECISIONS AND CONCERTED PRACTICES - SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM - QUANTITATIVE CRITERIA DETERMINING SELECTION - PROHIBITION

( EEC TREATY , ART . 85 ( 1 ))

Summary

1 . ALTHOUGH ARTICLE 190 OF THE TREATY REQUIRES THE COMMISSION TO MENTION THE FACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES JUSTIFYING A DECISION AND THE CONSIDERATIONS WHICH LED TO ITS ADOPTION , IT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE COMMISSION TO DISCUSS ALL THE ISSUES OF FACT AND LAW WHICH WERE RAISED DURING THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE .

2 . A SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT NOT CONTAINING ANY PROHIBITION ON EXPORTS CANNOT QUALIFY FOR BLOCK EXEMPTION UNDER REGULATION NO 67/67/EEC OF THE COMMISSION IF THE UNDERTAKINGS CONCERNED ARE ENGAGED IN A CONCERTED PRACTICE AIMED AT RESTRICTING PARALLEL IMPORTS INTENDED FOR AN UNAUTHORIZED DEALER .

3 . A PROHIBITION OF SALES BETWEEN AUTHORIZED DEALERS PROVIDED FOR IN A STANDARD AGREEMENT USED BY AN UNDERTAKING WHICH APPLIES A SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM CONSTITUTES A RESTRICTION OF THE ECONOMIC FREEDOM OF SUCH DEALERS AND , CONSEQUENTLY , A RESTRICTION OF COMPETITION WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) OF THE EEC TREATY . THE FACT THAT THE UNDERTAKING CONCERNED NEVER IMPEDED EXPORTS BY ITS DEALERS IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO PRECLUDE THE EXISTENCE OF A CLEAR PROHIBITION OF EXPORTS .

4 . A CLAUSE INSERTED IN A STANDARD AGREEMENT USED BY AN UNDERTAKING WHICH APPLIES A SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM CONSTITUTES AN INFRINGEMENT OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) OF THE TREATY IF IT PERMITS THAT UNDERTAKING TO SCRUTINIZE THE WORDING OF DEALERS ' ADVERTISEMENTS AS REGARDS SELLING PRICES AND TO PROHIBIT SUCH ADVERTISEMENTS .

5 . A SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FALLS WITHIN THE PROHIBITION LAID DOWN BY ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) OF THE TREATY IF IT PROVIDES FOR THE SELECTION OF DEALERS ON THE BASIS NOT ONLY OF QUALITATIVE BUT ALSO OF QUANTITATIVE CRITERIA . THAT IS THE CASE WHERE AN UNDERTAKING WHICH APPLIES A SYSTEM OF THAT KIND RESERVES THE RIGHT NOT TO APPOINT A NEW QUALIFIED DEALER IF , IN A SMALL AREA , THERE IS ALREADY A LARGE NUMBER OF DEALERS AND WHERE IT RESTRICTS THE FREEDOM OF DEALERS , EVEN AUTHORIZED DEALERS , TO ESTABLISH THEIR BUSINESS IN A LOCATION IN WHICH IT CONSIDERS THEIR PRESENCE CAPABLE OF INFLUENCING COMPETITION BETWEEN DEALERS .

Top