# C_2005092EN.01003001.xml

| 16.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/30

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on Concentrations given at its 124th meeting on 26 March 2004 concerning a draft decision relating to Case COMP/M.3255 — Tetra Laval/Sidel

(2005/C 92/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

| 1. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the absence of any mention of the Tetra Fast technology in Tetra Laval's original notification of 18 May 2001 was incorrect or misleading within the meaning of Article 14(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the absence of any mention of the Tetra Fast technology in Tetra Laval's original notification of 18 May 2001 was incorrect or misleading within the meaning of Article 14(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89.

| 2. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that absence of any information on the Tetra Fast technology in Tetra Laval's Article 11 Reply to questions 4 and 5 of the Request for Information of 13 July 2001 was incorrect within the meaning of Article 14(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that absence of any information on the Tetra Fast technology in Tetra Laval's Article 11 Reply to questions 4 and 5 of the Request for Information of 13 July 2001 was incorrect within the meaning of Article 14(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89.

| 3. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's legal assessment of the facts, namely that Tetra Laval's behaviour in both cases constitutes a very serious infringement that must be considered grossly negligent. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission's legal assessment of the facts, namely that Tetra Laval's behaviour in both cases constitutes a very serious infringement that must be considered grossly negligent.

| 4. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on Tetra Laval pursuant to Article 14(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on Tetra Laval pursuant to Article 14(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89.

| 5. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on Tetra Laval pursuant to Article 14(1)(c) of the Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. |
| --- | --- |

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on Tetra Laval pursuant to Article 14(1)(c) of the Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89.

| 6. | The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the amount of the fines. |
| --- | --- |

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the amount of the fines.

| 7. | The Advisory Committee agrees on recommending the publication of this Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees on recommending the publication of this Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

| 8. | The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account all the other points raised during the discussion. |
| --- | --- |

8.

The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account all the other points raised during the discussion.

---