No C 341/18 Official Journal of the European Communities 19. 12. 83 
Opinion on the draft Commission Regulation on the application of Article 85 (3) of the 
Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the Euro­
pean Communities No C 165 of 24 June 1983. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
In connection with the drawing up of an opinion on the 11th report on competition 
policy issued by the Commission of the European Communities, the Economic and 
Social Committee has delivered an additional opinion on this subject under the third 
paragraph of Article 20 of its Rules of Procedure. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
210th plenary session held in Brussels on 28 and 29 September 1983. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the third paragraph of Article 20 of 
its Rules of Procedure, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau 
on 27 October 1982 to deliver, in connection with 
the drawing up of an opinion on the 11th report on 
competition policy, an opinion on the draft Com­
mission Regulation on the application of 
Article 85 (3) of the Treaty to certain categories of 
motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements, 
and to instruct the Section for Industry, Commerce, 
Crafts and Services to prepare an opinion and a 
report on the subject, 
Having regard to the opinion drawn up by the afore­
mentioned Section at its meeting on 7 September 
1983, 
Having regard to the report submitted by the rappor­
teur, Mr Eelsen, 
Having regard to the discussions at its 210th plenary 
session held on 28 and 29 September 1983 (meeting 
of 28 September), 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
by a majority vote with seven against and six 
abstentions: The Committee approves the Commission's propos­
al to exempt vertical distribution in the motor vehi­
cle sector from the general ban stipulated in 
Article 85(1) of the Treaty; the conditions of 
exemption are laid down in Article 85 (3) and Regu­
lation No 19/65/EEC. The Committee's approval is 
subject to the following comments. 
The Committee requests that the Commission pro­
posal be re-examined and clarified in the light of the 
following comments and proposals. 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee notes that vertical distribution 
systems for motor vehicles: 
— enable manufacturers to market their products 
rationally and in compliance with the basic 
rules on competition, 
— are designed to allow dealers to fulfil their cus­
tomer obligations in the best possible way and 
to help them meet the financial, economic and 
social-security requirements which their profes­
sion imposes on them, 
— contribute to maintaining high standards of 
safety in motor vehicles by making available 
to customers: 
(a) an after-sales network; 
19. 12. 83 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 341 /19 
(b) trained dealer staff (the dealers themselves 
and the manufacturers contributing to train­
ing and refresher courses); 
(c) appropriate equipment and spare parts for 
carrying out maintenance work and repairs 
anywhere in the Community regardless of 
where the vehicle was bought. 
The Committee nevertheless considers it necessary 
to ensure that the distribution system in question 
fulfils all the requirements of the Commission's 
competition policy. munity competition between motor vehicle manu­
facturers, especially in those model ranges most in 
demand by consumers. Nevertheless, it is important 
to ensure a fair balance between the parties' recipro­
cal rights and obligations in the interests of competi­
tion and consumers. 
2.2. The implementation of Article 3 (9) (b) of the 
draft Regulation should not lead to acceptance of 
non-authorized sellers, otherwise the whole concept 
of exclusive distribution would be destroyed. 
1.2. A regulation laying down a standard contract 
governing relations between manufacturers and 
dealers is not regarded as desirable. Nor would this 
seem to be the Commission's intention. Under these 
circumstances the Committee considers that the 
draft Regulation must not go beyond the definition 
of some fundamental principles governing relations 
between manufacturers and dealers, and that suffi­
cient scope should be left for the exercise of con­
tractual freedom within a framework of genuine 
consultation. 2.3. The Committee believes that the Commission 
should make a more thorough study of the spare 
parts market so as to ensure that the clauses con­
cerning spare parts comply with the four de facto 
conditions laid down in Article 85 (3) of the Treaty. 
For the moment the Committee objects to the inclu­
sion of the supply of spare parts in the Regulation. 
It considers that it is of vital importance to safe­
guard the interests of consumers, particularly in re­
spect of spare-part availability, price, quality and 
guarantees. 
The Committee has already voiced its views on this 
subject on a separate occasion (') and believes that 
the Commission should not adopt too many specific 
regulations applicable to individual economic sec­
tors. 
1.3. The Committee also notes that the text of the 
draft Regulation, which is a considerable improve­
ment on the preliminary draft, could be simplified 
still further. 
2. Specific comments 2.4. Article 5 (6) states that manufacturers must be 
prepared to supply all EEC dealers with the whole 
range of their models. This is impracticable and 
does not generally reflect economic and commercial 
realities; not only do patterns of demand differ from 
Member State to Member State but the European 
Community has also failed so far to eliminate all 
technical and fiscal differences between the Mem­
ber States. Nevertheless, consumers should be able 
to order from anywhere in the Community a vehicle 
meeting the specifications legally required in the 
country of registration provided that such a vehicle 
is supplied in that country. 
2.1. The draft Regulation is based on two consid­
erations : 
— distribution networks (dealers) are in a rather 
weak position vis-a-vis manufacturers, who 
might be in a position to take advantage of 
them, 2.5. Article 7 amounts to a suspension of the 
clause on exclusive distribution when prices net of 
tax differ by more than 12 % between any two EEC 
markets for a period of more than six months. The 
Committee notes in this connection: 
— the distribution system could lead to a compart-
mentalization of EEC markets. 
These considerations do not always reflect reality 
and underestimate the keenness of intra-Com-
(') Opinion on the 10th report on competition policy (OJ 
NoC 112,3.5. 1982). that prices vary considerably from time to time 
and from area to area in the EEC, and this is 
regrettable, 
that price controls in certain Member States and 
the failure to complete the process of European 
integration, particularly in the fiscal and mone­
tary fields, play an important part in bringing 
No C 341/20 Official Journal of the European Communities 19. 12. 83 
this situation about; moreover, the Commission 
recognizes this in so far as the draft Regulation 
waives price comparison in those Member 
States where price controls or motor vehicle 
taxes are particularly severe, 
that consumers are in any case free to choose 
the dealer they wish to go to, that the maximum permitted price difference, as 
referred to in the draft Regulation, must be 
regarded in the first instance as an objective 
without any automatic legal force. The more 
complete the process of European integration, 
the easier it will be to achieve this objective. 
Done at Brussels, 28 September 1983. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois CEYRAC 
APPENDIX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
Rejected amendment 
The following amendment to the Section opinion, tabled in accordance with the Rules of Pro­
cedure, was defeated by the Committee during the discussion: 
Page 5, paragraph 2.5 
Omit the last indent. 
Reason 
To lay down an objective without legal force merely means that the existence of the objective will 
increase the discontent of the UK consumer with the motor industry which has been charging 
him anything up to 40 % more than is charged in Belgium, whilst in no way preventing the indus­
try from taking appreciably higher prices in the UK market than elsewhere. This is not European 
integration; there are not the same complaints against other industries, and the lack of integration 
does not affect the motor industry particularly; it merely — combined with the right of exclusive 
distribution — gives it opportunities to charge higher prices which other industries do not have. 
Voting 
For: 26, against: 64, abstentions: 17.