EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 52007XX1026(04)

Final report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.3848 — Sea-Invest/EMO-EKOM (Pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21 )

SL C 251, 26.10.2007, p. 6–6 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

26.10.2007   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/6


Final report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.3848 — Sea-Invest/EMO-EKOM

(Pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(2007/C 251/07)

On 24 February 2006, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (the Merger Regulation) by which the undertaking Sea-Invest N.V. acquires, by way of purchase of shares, joint control of the undertakings Europees Massagoed-Overslagsbedrijf B.V. and Erts- en Kolen Overslagsbedrijf B.V. (EMO-EKOM). Following the transaction EMO-EKOM will be jointly controlled by Sea-Invest N.V., Thyssen-Krupp Veerhaven B.V., H.E.S. Beheer N.V. and Manufrance B.V.

By decision dated 31 March 2006, the Commission found that the transaction raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market and the functioning with the EEA Agreement. Accordingly, the Commission initiated proceedings in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) of the Merger Regulation. Subsequently, on 3 May 2006, the Commission decided to extend the procedure with 20 working days pursuant to Article 10(3)(2) of the Merger Regulation.

On 4 April 2006, Sea-Invest was upon request granted access to certain ‘key documents’ in the Commission's file in accordance with Chapter 7.2 of the Commission Note on ‘Best Practices on the conduct of EC Merger control proceedings’.

Following an in-depth market investigation the relevant Commission services considered that the serious doubts had been removed and that the proposed transaction would not significantly impede effective competition in the common market or a substantial part of it. Accordingly, no Statement of Objections was sent to the parties.

No queries or submission have been made to the Hearing Officer by the parties or any other third party. The case does not call for any particular comments as regards the right to be heard.

Brussels, 26 July 2006.

Serge DURANDE


Top