This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 61989TJ0143
Sumarul hotărârii
Sumarul hotărârii
++++
1. Competition ° Agreements, decisions and concerted practices ° Agreements between undertakings ° Anti-competitive object or effect ° Effect on trade between Member States ° Criteria ° Assessed overall and not at the level of each participant
(EEC Treaty, Art. 85(1))
2. Competition ° Agreements, decisions and concerted practices ° Adverse effect on competition ° Criteria for assessment ° Anti-competitive object ° Finding to that effect sufficient
(EEC Treaty, Art. 85(1))
3. Competition ° Agreements, decisions and concerted practices ° Adverse effect on competition ° Article 85(1) of the Treaty ° Either anti-competitive object or effect required ° Different language versions taken into account
(EEC Treaty, Art. 85(1))
4. Competition ° Agreements, decisions and concerted practices ° Effect on trade between Member States ° Criteria
(EEC Treaty, Art. 85(1))
5. Competition ° Community rules ° Infringements ° Intentional commission ° Meaning
(Council Regulation No 17, Art. 15)
6. Community law ° Principles ° Equal treatment ° Discrimination ° Meaning
7. Action for annulment ° Pleas in law ° Misuse of powers ° Meaning
1. In order to establish whether an undertaking can be found to have infringed Article 85(1) of the Treaty, the only relevant questions are whether it participated with other undertakings in an agreement having the object or effect of restricting competition and whether that agreement was liable to affect trade between Member States. The question whether the individual participation of the undertaking concerned in that agreement could, notwithstanding its limited scale, restrict competition or affect trade between Member States is entirely irrelevant.
Moreover, that provision does not require the restrictions of competition ascertained actually to have appreciably affected trade between Member States but merely requires that it be established that the agreement was capable of having that effect.
2. For the purpose of applying Article 85(1) of the Treaty, there is no need to take account of the concrete effects of an agreement when it is apparent that it has as its object the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the common market.
3. For there to be an infringement of Article 85(1) of the Treaty, it is not necessary that an agreement, decision or concerted practice have both an anti-competitive object and effect, as is suggested by the Italian version of that provision. That version cannot prevail by itself against all the other language versions, which, by using the term "or", clearly show that the condition in question is not cumulative but alternative. The uniform interpretation of rules of Community law requires that they be interpreted and applied in the light of the versions existing in the other Community languages.
4. Article 85(1) of the Treaty does not require the restrictions of competition ascertained actually to have appreciably affected trade between Member States but merely requires that it be established that the agreement was capable of having that effect.
5. It is not necessary for an undertaking to have been aware that it was infringing the competition rules laid down in the Treaty for an infringement to be regarded as having been committed intentionally; it is sufficient that it could not have been unaware that the object of its conduct was the restriction of competition.
6. For there to be an infringement of the principle of equal treatment, comparable situations must have been treated differently.
7. A measure is vitiated by a misuse of powers only if it appears, on the basis of objective, relevant and consistent factors, to have been taken with the exclusive purpose, or at any rate the main purpose, of achieving an end other than that stated or evading a procedure specifically prescribed by the Treaty for dealing with the circumstances of the case.