Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
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

Document 52014XX0925(01)

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 3 March 2014 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39952 Power Exchanges — Rapporteur: the Netherlands

IO C 334, 25.9.2014, 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)

25.9.2014   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 334/3

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 3 March 2014 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39952 Power Exchanges

Rapporteur: the Netherlands

(2014/C 334/04)

1.

The Advisory Committee shares the Commission’s concerns expressed in its draft Decision as communicated to the Advisory Committee.

2.

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 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA.

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practices contained in the draft decision.

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA.

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practices was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA.

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practice have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU.

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringement.

8.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision.

9.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the value of sales.

10.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines.

11.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that there are no aggravating and no mitigating circumstances applicable in this case.

12.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that it does not apply any increase to the fines for the purpose of deterrence in this case.

13.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2008 Settlement Notice.

14.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.

15.

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