# C_2020434EN.01000801.xml

| 15.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 434/8 |
| ---------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | ------- |

---

Final Report of the Hearing Officer ( 1 ) Case AT.40127 – Canned vegetables (Text with EEA relevance) (2020/C 434/07) The present report concerns a draft cartel settlement decision to be adopted in accordance with the procedure foreseen in Article 10a of Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 ( 2 ) (the ‘Draft Decision’). The Draft Decision is addressed to Bonduelle ( 3 ), Coroos ( 4 ), and Groupe CECAB ( 5 ) (collectively ‘the Settling Parties’). According to the Draft Decision, the Settling Parties participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101(1) of the TFEU and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement between 19 January 2000 and 1 October 2013, consisting in price coordination, market sharing and the exchange of commercially sensitive information in relation to the sale of certain types of canned vegetables to retailers and/or the food service industry in the EEA. On 17 February 2017, the Commission initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 against the Settling Parties and one other undertaking. ( 6 ) Following settlement discussions ( 7 ) and settlement submissions ( 8 ) in accordance with Article 10a(2) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, the Commission adopted a Statement of Objections (‘SO’) on 25 July 2019 addressed to the Settling Parties. In their respective replies to the SO the Settling Parties confirmed pursuant to Article 10a(3) of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 that the SO reflected the contents of their settlement submissions. Pursuant to Article 16 of Decision 2011/695/EU, I have examined whether the Draft Decision deals only with objections in respect of which the Settling Parties have been afforded the opportunity of making known their views. I conclude that it does so. In view of the above, and taking into account that the Settling Parties have not addressed any requests or complaints to me ( 9 ), I consider that the effective exercise of the procedural rights of the Settling Parties to the proceedings in this case has been respected. Brussels, 26 September 2019. Joos STRAGIER
( 1 )  Pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 275, 20.10.2011, p. 29). ( 2 )  Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 of 7 April 2004 relating to the conduct of proceedings by the Commission pursuant to Articles 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 18) as last amended by Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/1348 (OJ L 208, 5.8.2015, p. 3) (‘Regulation No 773/2004’). ( 3 )  Bonduelle SCA, Bonduelle SA (formerly Bonduelle SAS) and Bonduelle Europe Long Life SAS. ( 4 )  Coroos International NV, Coroos Beheer BV and Coroos Conserven BV. ( 5 )  Centrale Cooperative Agricole Bretonne SCA, Compagnie Generale de Conserve SAS and GIE Groupe d'aucy (formerly GIE Groupe CECAB). ( 6 )  At the time of the present report, proceedings concerning this other undertaking are ongoing under the general (non-settlement) provisions of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004. ( 7 )  Settlement discussions took place between March 2017 and June 2019. ( 8 )  The Settling Parties submitted their formal requests to settle between [...]. ( 9 )  Under Article 15(2) of Decision 2011/695/EU, parties to the proceedings in cartel cases, which engage in settlement discussions pursuant to Article 10a of Regulation (EC) No 773/2004, may call upon the hearing officer at any stage during the settlement procedure in order to ensure the effective exercise of their procedural rights. See also paragraph 18 of Commission Notice 2008/C 167/01 on the conduct of settlement procedures in view of the adoption of Decisions pursuant to Article 7 and Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 in cartel cases (OJ C 167, 2.7.2008, p. 1).

---