Cartel Horizontal Agreement

In the sixth episode of the Oxford Law Vox podcast series, competition law expert Frank Wijckmans talks with George Miller about EU cartels and competition rules. In addition to Filip Tuytschaever, Frank is the author of horizontal agreements and agreements in EU competition law and discusses the most important themes of the book with Law Vox. Horizontal agreements (i.e. agreements between companies operating at the same level of production or trade) can affect competition and are subject to EU competition rules, including Article 101 of the TFUE. In 2011, the European Commission adopted guidelines for the evaluation of cooperation agreements between competitors. These guidelines complement category exemption regulations for research and development agreements and specialization agreements. Any form of serious restriction of competition (so-called “strict” restrictions), such as price-fixing agreements, production restrictions, market shares or customer groups, is prohibited regardless of the parties` position in the market. In the carton (15), the cartel members anticipated and planned simultaneous and consistent price increases throughout the Community and took concerted measures to control the delivery of the product to ensure that these concerted price increases were achieved. (1) Julian Mathic Joshua, (2) First Report on Competition Policy, page 15. (3) Decision 69/240, Official Journal 1969 L 192/5. (4) Decision 93/82, Jo 1993 L 34/20.

(5) Common Affairs T-24-25-26-28/93, [1996] ECR II 1019. (6) Decision 94/815, Official Journal 1994 L 343/1. (7) Decision 94/601, Official Journal 1994 L 243/1. (8) Cases T-295/94 et al(not yet notified) delivered on 14 May 1998. (9) Decision 99/60, Official Journal 1999 L 24/1. (10) The highest fine of 70 million euros was imposed on the electrical engineering group ABB, or 70 million euros, and nine other companies imposed fines totalling 22.21 million euros. (11) Cases T-141/94 et al. (not yet notified) T-141/94 et al., delivered on 11 March 1999. (12) Decision 79/934, Official Journal 1979 L 286/32. (13) Decision 92/444, Official Journal 1992 L 246/37. (14) Case 48/69, [1972] ECR 619.

(15) See note 8. (16) See footnotes 9 and 11. (17) Decision 82/123, Official Journal 1982 L 54/36. (18) Decision 89/44, Official Journal 1989 L22/12. (19) UK Tractor, Decision 92/157, Official Journal 1992 L 68/19, 37. Z. 38. (21) Twelfth Report on Competition Policy, z.

39. (22) Common Affairs 89, 104, 114, 116, 117 and 125-129/85 [1993 ECR I 307. (23) See note 8. (24) Guidelines for calculating fines imposed under Article 15, paragraph 2, Regulation 17 and Article 65, paragraph 5, of the ECSC Treaty, Official Journal 1998 C 9. (25) Commission Communication on Non-Taxation or Reduction of Fines for Cartels and Abuse of Dominant Position, Official Journal 1996 C 207/4. (26) See note 8. (27) See note 9. The documents contained on this website are intended exclusively for general information purposes and are subject to non-responsibility. Offences fall into three categories: minor offences, serious offences and very serious offences. These are usually horizontal restrictions, such as cartels. B of price and market allocation rates, as discussed in this presentation. The Carton case is cited by the Commission as an example in this category.

Among the most recent cases are the Commission`s decision in the area of the heating pipe cartel, the Commission`s first decision on a genuine bid manipulation agreement, and the trial court`s decision in the Steel Beams case. The article 101, paragraph 3 evaluation of the EUTF is carried out by a market analysis that carefully balances the anti-competitive and anti-competitive economic effects of an agreement.

Dette indlæg blev udgivet i Ikke-kategoriseret. Bogmærk permalinket.