COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
C0MC90) 260 final 
Brussels, 18 June 1990 
COMMUNICATION BY THE COMMISSION 
Report on the possibility of a group 
exemption for consortia agreements in liner shipping 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) 
on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty 
to certain categories of agreements, decisions and 
concerted practices between shipping companies 
(presented by the Commission) 
- 1 -
Communication by the. Commission 
Report on the possibility of a group exemption 
for consortia agreements in liner shipping 
1. Introduction 
1.1. In December 1986, at the time of the adoption of Regulation 
no. 4956/86, the Commission undertook to submit within one year, a 
report to the Council on whether to provide for block exemptions 
for consortia, and to make proposals to that tffect if 
(1 > necessary 
1.2. As explained in the interim reports made to the Transport Working 
(2) (3) 
Group on 7 January and 29 November 1988 , the Commission was 
unable despite its repeated efforts to complete its work within one 
year because the industry did not make available to it a sufficient 
number of consortia agreements to constitute a satisfactory basis 
for analysis. This was finally done in stages up to September 1989. 
2. paçkflrouno: 
2.1. The Commission is aware of present and prospective developments and 
organisational changes in world shipping and the implications which 
these may have for the Community's shipping and competition 
policies. 
(1) See Council Doc. No. 11584/86 MAR 84 of 19 December 1986 Annex III 
(2) See doc. No. 4130/88 MAR 3 of 11.1.1988 
} See doc. No 10048/88 MAR 38 of 13.12.1988 
- 2 -
Competition in the liner shipping industry has created the need for 
companies to be efficient in order to compete on the world market. 
The shipping industry is a capital intensive one, with a high 
proportion of fixed to variable costs. Ships therefore need to be 
as fully utilised as possible if the capital costs are to be 
covered. Individual enterprises acting alone without having strong 
financial resources are in a vulnerable position if heavy 
overcapacity shows itself on their particular trade routes. 
2.2. The development of container services has increased pressures for 
co-operation and rationalisation, especially on the longer deep sea 
trade routes. Because of the large amounts of cargo which can be 
handled daily from a containership, operators have been able to use 
bigger ships without increasing, and indeed even reducing, port 
time. However, since the amount of cargo available remains much the 
same, fewer of the larger ships are needed to serve a particular 
trade. Community shipowners have difficulty to operate with 
container ships of the size needed to obtain the available 
economies scale and thus minimise costs, whilst maintaining a 
satisfactory frequency of service. 
2.3. Other related pressures towards closer association between 
operators on containerised trade routes were that: 
- the establishment of a container service necessitated an initial 
capital investment greater than that required to replace tonnage 
on conventional services. Individual lines therefore hesitated to 
make this investment on their own account; 
- container ships were less free to transfer from one trade to 
another because many were designed for a particular trade route; 
in addition many ports did not have the equipment and 
infrastructure to handle container ships (a problem which still 
exists in some developing countries) 
2.4. These pressures for cooperation led individual shipping lines to 
enter into joint fleet operations usually described as consortia. 
- 3 -
3. Analysis of consortia agreements 
3.1. The Comité des Associations d'Armateurs des Communautés Européennes 
(CAACE) has provided the Commission with a list of consortia 
serving Europe showing the conference, the consortium and its 
members and indicating the scope of clauses included. A copy of the 
list is attached as Annex I. 
The Commission has also received copies of the 23 consortia 
agreements listed in Annex II. The Commission has been asked to 
treat the details of these agreements as confidential. 
3.2. The examination of the agreements in the possession of the 
Commission and of such information as has been given by CAACE and 
by others has permitted the following findings: 
(i) There are approximately 57 consortia operating worldwide, at 
least 48 of which operate in Community liner trades. The 
number of consortia in particular trade, their organisation 
and membership, and the scope and terms of the consortia 
agreements all vary. 
<ii) The variety and complexity of the different arrangements is 
considerable. Almost the only common factor is that they are 
coalitions of several independent shipping lines seeking some 
form of co-operation in order to maintain profitability 
through rationalisation in the widest sense and to spread the 
expense of investment in container operations. Each could, in 
principle, be considered sui generis. However, a number of 
specific arrangements seem to be common to most consortia. 
/ 
/ - 4 -
(iiî) Joint, fleet.operations 
a) Joint schedule: 37 consortia 
b) Space/slot exchange: 37 
c) Equipment pool: 28 (in some cases optional or only amongst 
some members of the consortium) 
d) Joint operational office: 38 
<iv) Terminals 
a) Joint terminal operation: 37 (in some cases only optional) 
b) Joint terminal contracts: 37 (in some cases optional or 
negotiated jointly but concluded separately) 
(v) PQQlinff 
a) Cargo pool: 28 
b) Revenue pool: 28 
c) Net result pool: 27 
(vi) Conference riKhts 
5 consortia hold single voting rights in conferences in which 
they participate. 
4 consortia whilst not having formal voting rights in 
conferences do nevertheless act in that way. 
- 5 -
(vii) Marketinn 
a) Joint marketing: 18 
(some limited by regions) 
b) Joint bill of lading: 22 
(viii)joint price fiMina 
7 consortia have pricing fixing authority. 
CAACE has indicated that in some cases the consortium would 
have the authority to fix prices but that the "no" in the 
descriptive list means that it does not do so in practice. In 
some other trades the consortium operates either outside the 
conference or on routes where there is no conference. 
<ix> Inland operatipna 
a) Joint consolidation: 18 (some are optional or limited by 
regions) 
b) Joint haulage: 16 (some are optional or limited by 
regions) 
<*> Durât ion/terminatio,n 
Clauses concerning duration and termination of consortia 
agreements are not included in CAACE's list. Of the 23 
agreements examined by the Commission: 
a) Indefinite duration until cancellation/termination: 11 
b) Limited duration or without prolongation clause: 18 (2 
agreements do not contain clear provisions) 
- 6 -
c) Cancellation/termination 
36 months notice: 1 Agreement 
24 months notice: 2 
12 months notice: 6 
6 months notice: 8 
Specific rules: 4 
d) Without cancellation/termination clause: 1 
(xi) Purposes/objectives of consortia agreements 
This aspect has not been dealt with by CAACE's descriptive 
list. In the 23 agreements the following clauses ore typical: 
"The purpose of the Agreement is to establish a joint 
service/consortium capable of securing the economies and 
advantages of modern shipping technology through coordinated 
management of roll-on/roll-off., container or similar modern 
vessels, and all related activities". 
"To enable the parties to operate a service as defined in the 
agreement in the most economical and efficient way; to 
promote and maximize the trade and the movement of cargoes 
between the points and ports referred to". 
"The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize the parties to 
continue their joint service in the trades covered by this 
Agreement". 
"The purpose of this Agreement is to enable the parties 
collectively to establish and maintain a superior overfull 
common carrier shipping service, and thereby to promote to 
oceanborne commerce, in the trade between "... and ...". 
7 -
"The purpose of the Agreement is to allow the partners hereto 
to operate as an ocean common carrier by direct call or 
intermodal through service under the name ... as provided 
herein". 
"The purpose of the Agreement is to permit the parties to 
achieve efficiencies and economics in offering services in 
the trades covered by the Agreement". 
"To cooperate in the operation of a joint container service 
between ... and the ... - including the inland movement of 
containers - for the purpose of achieving optimal economic 
results through operation of container vessels and sharing 
the outcome through money pool upon the terms and conditions 
set forth in the agreement". 
3.3. Multiple membership 
a) According to the information available there are 47 European 
shipping lines participating in 35 consortia serving European 
trades. (In the remaining 5 consortia serving European trades 
there seem to be no European shipping lines participating). 
Some of these shipping lines are members of more than one 
consortium : 
CGM participates in 13 consortia 
Nedlloyd " 12 
Hapag Lloyd " 11 
P&OCL " 7 
CMB " 6 
Swedish Transocean " 5 
Incotrans " 4 
- 8 -
Cunard 
EAC 
Charente Harrisson 
E Herman 
Lloyd Triestino 
Uilh. Wilhelmsen 
Finncarriers 
Hoegh 
Johnson 
Wallenius 
DAL 
Delmas-Vieljeux 5 lines each participate in 3 consortia 
7 lines each participate in 2 consortia 
b) Shipping lines which are members of a consortium are in many 
cases also member of a conference. Some conferences have, 
among their members, the participants in more than one 
consortium. For instance, as shown in Annex III, 
- the members of the consortia CAROL, EURO-Caribe, S.A.C. and 
Streamline are all members of the Association of West India 
Transatlantic Steamship Lines, the WITASS Conference; 
- the members of the consortia OMEX, Scan Dutch, TRIO, ACE and 
Med Club are members of the Far Eastern Freight Conference; 
It should be noted that there are also other situations in 
European liner shipping trades. Two examples might be cited: 
The Europe/Australia & New Zealand Conference used to have 
participants in four consortia among its members (ANZECS, 
ACT(A)ANL, Scancarriers and Scanbarber). Scancarriers was taken 
over by one of its members and Scanbarber as well as ACT(A)ANL 
were disbanded, so that this Conference is now almost (except 
for Baltic Shipping Company) identical with the ANZECS 
consortium. As a second example, the UK West Africa Lines Joint 
Service (UKWAL) is a consortium which is also a conference. 
- 9 -
4. Views of shipowners and shippers 
4.1. CAACE and CENSA have argued, in various submissions to the 
Commission, that Community shipping lines need to participate in 
consortia in order "not to be put at a disadvantage compared with 
their competitors, the single entity, multi-trade giants". In their 
view consortia are either excepted, as technical agreements, under 
Article 2 of Regulation No 4856/86, or are covered by the block 
exemption in Article 3 of the same regulation. For cases not so 
covered there should be a group exemption. These views were not 
shared by the Union of Greek shipowners who argued that the 
Commission should only grant individual exemptions, where 
appropriate. 
4.2. The British Shippers' Council his informed thé Commission that, in 
its view, consortia are covered neither by Article 2 nor by 
Article 3 of Regulation No 4056/86 and that a new block exemption 
would be inappropriate. Individual exemptions should be granted 
only with special conditions and obligations. The European 
Shippers' Councils hold similar views, arguing that consortia 
should apply for individual exemption and that conditions and 
obligations, including an obligation to meaningful consultations 
with shippers, should be attached. 
5- The Legal Status of Consortia 
The examination of the texts of consortia agreements which have been 
made available and of other information available to the Commission 
services has led to the following main conclusions: 
s.i. Consortia are not mergers 
The information available suggests that consortia could not be 
regarded as mergers between the parties, for several reasons: 
a) All available agreements contain provisions to terminate the 
agreement with different periods of notice. 
- 18 -
b) There is no evidence which suggests that any of the parties to 
these agreements or to other agreements described by CAACE 
either transferred all its assets or activities to the 
consortium, so as to become mere holding companies, or 
completely and irreversibly abandoned business in the area 
covered by the consortium. 
On the contrary, the parties to consortia agreements remain free 
to act independently on other routes, to join consortia 
involving other parties for other routes or to join consortia 
for other routes involving the same or almost the same parties, 
but on different terms. The findings on multiple membership 
indicate that this is the case for many shipping lines. 
5.2. Consortia are not purely technical arrangements 
The information available suggests that there are few if any 
consortia agreements whose sole object and effect are to achieve 
technical improvements or cooperation in the sense of Article 2 of 
Regulation No. 4056/86. 
All but two of the 23 agreements examined contain arrangements not 
only on joint fleet and terminal operations but also on pooling 
and/or conference rights, pricing, marketing or inland operations. 
One of the two exceptions concerns a Slot Charter Agreement 
containing arrangements on joint schedule and space/Pint exchange 
and arrangements on capacity restrictions for one of the parties 
regarding certain European ports. The other case concerns an 
agreement containing arrangements on joint fleet and terminal 
operations. However, it also provides for cost sharing arrangements 
for ships, administration and equipment. In addition it provides 
that conference trading rights may only be exercised by agreement 
of the consortium policy committee and that the parties, without 
having joint marketing, "may combine their interests". 
In all these cases the consortium's sole object and effect are not 
purely technical. 
- 11 -
There are, according to CAACE's descriptive list, some other 
consortia agreements limited to arrangements on joint fleet and 
terminal operations. However, these agreements cannot be regarded 
as purely technical since for instance one agreement also contains, 
inter alia, the parties' agreement to avoid unreasonable or unfair 
sales and marketing competition amongst themselves through a common 
freight policy. Such agreements restrict competition and cannot be 
considered as having exclusively technical objects and effects. 
Finally, the parties to consortia agreements regulate the use of 
their vessel capacities in given trade routes and are actual or 
potential competitors. 
For all these reasons consortia cannot, other than perhaps in very 
exceptional cases, be considered as falling within the scope of 
Article 2 of Council Regulation 4056/86. 
5.3. consortia are not covered by the conference black exemption 
a) Conferences are arrangements which exist essentially to ensure 
that their members charge the same rates of freight. Some 
conferences also agree members' participation in a particular 
trade (which is defined either as sailing rights, ie the right 
to berth x number of sailings per annum from one area to another 
or as percentage shares in the trade) or even 'pool' either 
earnings or liftings (freight tons) or both: the intention 
generally being to equate 'share' with earnings and liftings. 
Consortia are pursuing different objectives and are different in 
organisation. The size of container ships (say 3 to 6 
conventional ships = 1 container ship) means that most single 
shipping companies are no longer capable of providing, on their 
own a satisfactory liner service to shippers. To be viable, a 
shipping service must provide a frequent, say weekly, service to 
its customers. Rationalisation of schedules is, therefore, a 
sine qua non of liner shipping with each participating line 
being allocated slots for each sailing. This is not the role of 
conferences. 
- 12 -
Shipowners agree that consortia are different from conferences. 
b) (consortia agreements, restrict or eliminate competition 
between the parties in some or all of the following areas: 
- the provision and use of capacity and transport facilities 
- timings and sailings 
- marketing 
- inland operations 
- their policies as conference members and 
- price competition (which is eliminated either by conference 
membership, or by arrangements in the consortium agreements 
which are to that extent equivalent to a conference 
agreement, or by some combination of the two). 
A considerable number of consortia agreements thus contain 
restrictive arrangements which go beyond the scope of Article 
3 of Council Regulation No 4056/86 and would therefore not be 
covered by the block exemption.for conferences, even if they 
could be considered as conference agreements. This is the 
case for most of the 23 agreements available to the 
Commission and it would also be the case for the majority of 
the other agreements mentioned in CAACE's list. 
c) Consortia are increasingly concerned with combined sea/land 
door-to-door transport. Multilateral agreements on combined 
sea/land transport are not covered by the conference block 
exemption, which applies only to the maritime sector. 
5.4. It follows that consortia agreements which restrict competition and 
affect trade between Member States must, if they are not to be 
considered null and void in accordance with Article 85(2) of the 
Treaty, be covered either by an individual or by a block exemption. 
In view of the number of consortia agreements and the need for 
shipowners to retain the flexibility necessary to change their 
agreements in response to changing competitive circumstances, it is 
- 13 -
desirable for administrative reasons to give a group exemption as 
far as possible. Accordingly the Commission has examined the scope 
for granting such a group exemption. 
6. Proposal for a block exemption 
6.1. Justification 
The Community shipping industry needs to attain the necessary 
economies of scale to compete on the world liner shipping market. 
Consortia can help to provide the necessary means for improving the 
productivity of liner shipping services and promoting technical and 
economic progress by facilitating and encouraging the use of 
containers. 
Users of the shipping services offered by consortia obtain several 
important advantages. First, they are ensured regular sailings at 
prices which do not depend on which ships are used for their 
containers. Second, economies of sca.le in the use of ships and 
on-shore facilities are achieved. Third, since consortia tend to 
bring about higher levels of capacity utilisation, costs are 
reduced for this reason also. Fourth, consortia increase the 
quality of shipping services by using more modern ships and 
equipment as well as port facilities. Last, but not least, through 
provision of joint inland services they are responding to many 
shippers' requirements for efficient door-to-door transport. 
Thus, users can obtain a share of the benefits resulting from the 
improvement in productivity and service. However, any group 
exemption must give a sufficient guarantee that consortia are able 
to realise their advantages to the fullest extent and that users 
get a fair share of the resulting rationalisation and reduction in 
costs. 
In order, therefore, to ensure that all the requirements of Article 
85(3) are met it would be necessary, inter alia, to attach to the 
block exemption certain conditions and/or obligations to ensure 
- 14 -
that a fair share of the benefits would be passed on to shippers 
and that competition in respect of a substantial part of the trades 
in question was not eliminated. 
6.2. Form 
A group exemption for consortia would need to be an independent, 
self-contained regulation, rather than an amendment or addition to 
any existing regulation, because 
- there is a great variety of different consortia arrangements 
operating under different circumstances; 
- consortia are a specialized form of joint ventures. Despite of 
the efforts of the Commission's services and the interested 
industries, it has proved impossible to draft a block exemption 
for joint ventures in general; 
- many consortia deal with multi-modal transport operations which 
fall partly within the scope of Regulation No 4056/86 and partly 
under Regulation No 1017/68 and, insofar as containers are 
concerned, partly under Regulation No 17/62; 
Consortia in liner shipping are a specialised and complex type of 
joint venture. Unlike most commercial and industrial joint ventures 
the scope, parties, activities and terms of consortia agreements 
are frequently altered. It would therefore, as well as for other 
reasons discussed above, be extremely difficult to decide which 
specific clauses and arrangements of consortia agreements should be 
permitted, and in what circumstances. It would also be undesirable 
to proceed in this way because it would often make legal advice 
necessary, and perhaps individual exemption by the Commission each 
time the terms of a consortium agreement are altered. A block 
exemption for consortia should therefore concentrate on clarifying 
the requirements under which consortia can be exempted from the 
prohibition of cartels pursuant Article 85(3) of the Treaty, rather 
than differentiating between consortia. 
- 15 -
6.3. gcope and content of the block exemption 
The block exemption would cover multi-modal as well as purely 
maritime consortia and would therefore be adopted on the basis of 
Regulation No 4856/86, No 1017/68 and No 17/62. 
The group exemption should cover as wide a variety as possible of 
the kinds of clauses which are found in consortia agreements. 
Since cooperation through consortia is a specific form of 
rationalisation cartels which goes further than conferences 
the Commission would need to attach some additional requirements to 
the block exemption. In fixing these requirements, e.g. certain 
conditions and/or obligations, the Commission must have regard not 
only to the interests of the shipping lines but also to those of 
shippers and of other transport modes who may compete with the land 
transport operations of members of consortia (for instance, road 
hauliers in respect of multi-modal consortia). 
The details of these requirements can only be fixed after further 
consultations with parties concerned and with Member States in the 
Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions. 
Nevertheless, as a preliminary statement, the Commission considers 
that it would be necessary, in particular, in order to make sure 
that the conditions of Article 85(3) are fulfilled : 
(i) to ensure that a fair share of the efficiency and other 
benefits from consortia could be passed on to shippers; 
(ii> to ensure that competition in respect of a substantial 
portion of the whole trade is not eliminated or unduly 
restricted, for instance by agreements between consortia 
operating in the same trade; 
(iii) to provide a maximum period of notice for withdrawal without 
penalty by a participant line; 
• - 16 -
(iv) to deal, in the case of multi-modal transport services 
offered by consortia, with multilateral agreements with 
inland hauliers on through rates; 
(v) to ensure non-discrimination between shippers or ports. 
In addition, there would need to be obligations relating, inter 
alia, to meaningful consultations with shippers, and rights for 
shippers to arrange their own inland haulage, if they wish. 
The group exemption for consortia will take account, among other 
things, of the fact that almost all members of consortia are also 
members of conferences governed by Regulation 4056; the 
requirements of the group exemption will deal with the additional 
limitations of competition brought about by consortia. 
6.4. The Commission considers that it would be desirable to grant a 
group exemption for consortia agreements. The Commission has 
thereby prepared the attached proposal (Annex IV) for a Council 
Regulation which would empower the Commission to grant a block 
exemption for consortia on the lines set out above. This enabling 
regulation follows the standard lines of such regulations and 
accordingly does not call for any specific comments. 
The Commission intends to clarify the position under competition 
law of multimodal transport containing a shipping leg 
simultaneously with the group exemption on consortia. 
CftACt 
Comit* t"i«* Association* d'Armatemre 
Commentetéa Européennes 
April l»fO -1-
tteet maeratl OM J I Tvrmlaalal | >—Urns | F&il«^tttl 
Ceaf Consortia VIWC lOTPfg ? 
• ** m.3 Vi 
« 
-« e St 
4* 2 
1. • m •* « 
li » 
I* S 
8 
IHL 5 It 
tS 
IZ ! i t 1 
JUL 2* 
12. >*t. II lelmms 
:l>fJ|sps*otl— 
1*1 
tl 
JJL S •ri 4» 
JLL 02. 
Non Conference 
OS-conference» 
(for North 
Atlantic and 
Gulf) 
Canadian 
M. Altantlc 
E4.W Bound 
Freight Confe­
rences 
Association of 
w. India Trans­
atlantic Steam 
Ship Lines 
Association of 
w. India Trans­
atlantic tteasi 
Ship Lines 
rwiTASS) Johnson 
Scanstar 
Sagumex 
St.Lawrence 
Co-ordinated 
Services 
Caribbean 
Overseas 
Lines 
(CAROL) 
SAC Blue Star Line (UK). East 
Asiatic C" (DK) 
Hapag Lloyd (D). CGM (p). 
GCL (Cunard, UK. Incotrana, 
NL, Swedish Tranaocean, 
Wallenius. S) 
Canada Mariti»e - comprising 
CMB (B> fc CP Ships (Can) 
and HL Containerline (UK) 
Charente Steamship c* Ltd 
(TfcJ Harrison Nanaqers) 
(UK), Napag-Lloyd (D). 
Itedlloyd (HL). CGM (F) 
llapag-Lloyd (D). 
Nicaragua national Line yes 
yes 
yes yes 
yes 
yes yea 
no 
no yes 
yes 
yea yea 
yes 
yes 
yea yea 
yes yes no 
yes 
for 
Ree­
fer 
yea yea yea yes 
yes 
yes 
(D) 
yes yes 
no 
no no 
no yea 
no 
no no 
no 
no yea 
no 
no yea 
no 
no 
yea yea yea no yes 
no yes yea yea yea yea yea 
.no 
no 
no yea 
no 
no 
no 
yea yea 
no 
no 
no 
yea 
«A» in some cases, the consortium would have the authority to price-fix but the "no" reflects that it does not do so. 
(B) Negotiated and agreed jointly, and indent ici»), but not ite fact "joint contracta". (F.) In sos* tradee. the consortium r>p*rstes either 
outside the conference or on routes where ther-ï ir. no conference. Tn nurli cases the consortium Is engaged in joint prie* fi'-*.^i. i 
jr. m 
CAACE 
ffc) I«i mmmm CMM, tlw c<MUN>rtl«m MWM «•«• ttw Mttmrlty to prle«-tl« tot tto •••• r«Cl«ct« ttot it «OM Mt «• •». -2-
CAMS -3-
-" **** *••••• th* cessattt— »aaM to*t eto •wtha^ty to pv>c«.ffN tot tto "nrn" r»ft«cta t>>«t it «M» wt*>». |C» f.l«tt«« to fasts**. 
<p> ttasu. is toth tto eofteartiaai ana tto raMcr***?*. to *ttt*r. tt an#»«jee In }«»«•* fuIca-fl«tn*. f«> la tow* trasas, tto ronaorttas <if*r»t«* »l*->«r 
totals* tto esafere*ca a* an roataa *»hi»ra »Hin t» ne C0»f>ren?». J* awe* cseec, tto eonaertlto 1* anoaeaf in )*••* salee-flals**. •wtaMe tto esafaramra av 
CAACE 
Fleet ape rat lane 11 »„i..un Pooling leant >lgami 
Cenferenee 
taréet/BR 
Conference 
reece - Tttrkey 
eeetorence -
N. Barepe Egypt 
Conferi 
lerael-Seanilaa-
vlaa Aaaoclatli Conaoitla 
.lead 
Centaiaer 
Bervleee 
Bear Beet 
Container 
Line 
Swedish 
Orient Linee 
IF) L • 
Bllemaa (BR), Faraeea Nitby (OK), 
Sim (la) 
(D), RNffji (ML) 
Swedleh Traaaoeeea (S) A 
Flancarriara (rin) yea 
yea yee 
yee 
yee t a 
F 
c c 
-4 O 
o-« St 
e i* 
08. 
x-»0 
yea fin » 40 *0 v a 00 u ît 
«-• v 
yea yea I 
yee 
yea am» I 
no 
yes ri|Mae*etleaJ pern 
* 1 
•53 
«4 C H Soil ¥ VF 
10 il m» 
.2UL 
ia_ 
yee lalaae 
rattat 
(A) 
u 
S3 
11 
ao 
yea I 
m» 
40 4 •4 14 il 
ZUL Jl 
yss 
yea t 
3 
a 
e* 
mê 
a JlS_ 
yea I 
o 
Indian 
laUad Coofe-
IC CON |F). Hapag Lloyd fD). 
BtMP (F), Seal (D). MRU 
). SNC (F) 
(AI In eana ceaea. the concert lam weald bava tb* authority to price-fin bet tHe 'ao" reflect* that It doe* not 
IT) am BEC m*ab«ca bet eporete te/fran EEC porta. 
CAACE 
Conference 
Far teat Frètent 
Conference 
Entente da Fret 
dee Llgaae da 
Navigation 
Servant Papaeta 
lamaaeelea 
Confereace 
Far Caetera 
Fraient Confe­
rence (Italy -
FE) Concertla 
ACS 
Bank a, 
Coloabaa 
Indonesia (F) 
Mat. Lines 
Djaeeeetrl 
NFECS 
(Hedcleb) tiEÊSQÈIÎkJEÊPtlWB EoeofR 
Meabere 
BOL (Sieg),00CL (MR). Korea 
Shippine Corp. (S.K.e.). Cbo 
Tans Shippine (S.K.o.) 
Sank Llae (OK), Coleabaa Llaa 
(D) 
Djakarta Lloyd I 
oaaorl Lleyi ] ,,, , 
Trlkors Lloyd | tm>) 
Saaedera ladoneele) 
RCHP (F), Lloyd Triestino (I), 
MOL (J), NYK (J), OMEX 
(Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore. 
South Korea) 1 Fleet operations 1 
a 
-4 
a . I *: a • 
40 
c 
«4 
a 
1 
yee 
yes 
» 
yes 40 
2e if 
e ° 
m • I 
40 
e 
I 
• 
23 
yea 
yee 
? 
yes no 
yee 
7 
yei .: 
it 
o 
m4 
l\ 
o-« 
«r*4* 4 
no 
no 
7 1 -r 
1 Tormlaa1e| 
m4 
2 
•4 u 
4* «4 
40 
40 a 
C «4 
of. 
S 
yee 
yea 
t 
ye* yea I 
E. 
m 4» 
40 a 
«e 
e« 
A 
yea 
yea 
T 
yea J Peeling 
I 
I 
M a a 1. 
yea 
yee 
» 
yes 9» 
I 
e 
9 c e > a 
14 B 
no 
yee 
7 
yon 1 
1 
40 
m-
9 m a 
•4 
40 a e 9 
no 
yee 
t 
yee cenf.l 
conaertia helda 
conference 
vatlne rlahta 
10 
no 
ao 
T 
no 1 Marketing] 
r 
•4 
40 I I 
4Ê • 
3 
a 
11 
no 
yea 
(C) 
» 
no n 
«4 
a-* 
•a 
44 • 
e — 
*»o U 
aa 
yee 
F 
yes Pig 
joint price * 
fixing 
11 
no 
no 
(E) 
» 
no | talema 1 
faaeratlona] 
J 
40 
4 
40 a 
!i 
14 
ae 
yea 
» 
no • 
a 
J! 
4.* 
C 
m* 
o 
is 
ao 
yea 
(CI 
T 
no -5 
1AI la sane eaaee. the L sneer I la* woal«J bsv* the aatborlty to price-fix bat the "ao* reflect* «*•* It doee not da 
traeee, the ro*eortl«e operatee either ovicide the conference or on roetee where there ie no conferee 
ia engaged in joint prlce-f ixlntj. (r) ne rcc aeabere bet operate to/bom EEC parte. ta) la (C) Limited by regtene. 
In each eaaee. the coneortli 
CAACE 
Conference 
temeneelo 
Barepe Freight 
Conference 
Far Santera 
Freight Confe­
rence 
For Santera 
Freight Confe­
rence 
Per Saetem 
Freight Confe­
rence 
emesjpe/ 
neetrolla s> 
N.B. confe­
rence Coaanrtla 
W999C9/9ÊÊ 
Xaeoneele 
Service 
i 
Oman IF) 
tcanbvtck 
Trio Reamers 
Madlleyd (ML), SAC (OR). 
Swedleh Traneacaaa (5). 
Wllh. Wlhelaeen (M) 
Cbe Tang Shippiag (f. Kor) " 
BOL (Sing). OOCL (NK) 
OSN (F). Beat Asiatic Ce. fBR) 
Nedlioyd (ML), Swedleh Traaeeceaa 
IS), «lib. wilbalmaaa (B) 
PfcOCL (OR) Ben Line (UK), * 
Napae-Lloyd (B), BTR (J), •! 
Nitaal OSK (J) 
CON (F). Bapag-Llovd (B), 
Lloyd Trieatlna (X), Bedlloyd 
(PLOCL (OK), SCNZ (H2) 1 Fleet eperatlane 1 
1 a *** 
4 
m 
a 
4* 
t 
-4 
a 1 
yee 
7 
yee 
yea 
yee 40 
• • 
2 
yea 
? 
yee 
yee 
yee 04 
I 
40 
e 
I 
-4 
i 3 
yee 
» 
yee 
ao 
yee 
(0) to «. 
ÏS O 
m» 
tt 
•4 O •"Î V*40 
4 
yea 
7 
yee 
yea 
«•» [ «ermlaelefj Fooling 
•4) 
t 
«4 u 
4*«* 
40 
tz 
•J _} 
!*• 
7 
yee 
yee 
yea w4 
I 
~4 e. 
• «4 
40 U *t 
Si 
4 
yee 
7 
yee 
yee 
yee — I t 
•4 e a 
1 
yea 
» 
f*c 
!•» 
yee #4 
I 
e 9 c 
: 
e 
44 B 
yea 
T 
yea 
yee 
yee 1 
I 
40 
0* 
9 m e 
M 
00 e e 
9 
yee 
7 
yea 
yea 
wily 
for 
•ee-tel 
contort it holds 
conference 
votine rlehte— 
IO 
no 
T 
no | Marketing J 
r 
-4 
40 
S 
4» 
1 
40 
S 
0 11 
yee 
7 
yee 
yen 
(CI e 
«4 
m — m 
•! • a-* 
«4 
°* 
~0 12 
yee 
7 
yee 
?•• pîl;J 
(A) 
e 
V 
to 
13 
ne 
T 
ne 
•». 1 lalane 1 
|oaeret lone] 
t 
m» 
40 
4 
II 
14 
yee 
T 
yee 
yee 
(C) • 
m» 
9 
2 
«y c 
art e ** 
1* 
yea 
7 
yea 
yee 
(Cl -b-
g 
(AI in 
(FI «a SEC eeeee. tba convection would have the authority ta prlce-f I* bet the 
~ ire bat operate te/fron SEC porte, (o) fteong eone manbara. »" refleete that It deea not de ae. (C) Limited by regieae. 
(A) In soste eases, the consortia*) would have the authority to price-fix last the "no" reflects that It doss not so . 
(ft) Negotiated and agreed jointly, and identical, but not in fact "Joint contracts". CAACE 
-7-
CAACE -7a-
e 
Cemfetmece 
NEUSARA/ 
USAMERA 
SEUSA/ 
MMRA essentia 
Sago 
North Ear. 
North Am. 
Space char­
ter and 
aalling 
agreement 
Vesael 
aharing 
agreement 
Teasel 
sharing 
agreement 
Mexico Meamera 
ACL, CGN, (F), Hapag-Lloyd 
(D) 
CON (F), Rapng-Lloyd (D). 
Incotrana (N), PfcOCL (UK). 
Medlloyd (N), Sea land 
(US) 
Nedlloyd (N), FtOCL (UK), 
Sea land (US) 
Nedlloyd (B), PCOCL (UK), 
Sealand (US), CTE (E) 
ACL. Tecomar (M) | Fleet operetli 
e 
w4 
i 
09 e • 
40 
G 
«4 
e 1 
yea 
yea 
yes 
yea 
yea ft I! 
2 
yea 
yea 
yea 
yea 
yea 0» I 
40 
e I 
«4 I 3 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no -1 
a 
ti 
-4 a 
4"» 4» 4 
yea 
yea 
no 
no 
no [ Terminale] 
1 
—4 Si 
40-04 
40 
38 
s 
yea 
yea 
yea 
yea 
yes 04) 
1 
f. 
a 00 •0 e m 
40 «4 
ÎÏ 
*-e s 
yea 
yea 
yen 
yea 
yee 1 Peeling 
04 I 
t m 
40 
1 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no 4-4 
I 
i 
• 
to • 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no IM 
0m 
I 
40 04 1 
to 
4* S 
» 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no y 
six 
Mi IO 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no Market tag || 
f 
«4 
00 i 1 
3 
e^ 
H 
no 
no 
no 
no 
BO e 
04 2! 
4»! 
12 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no -ii 
IA| 
e 
b 
11 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no • 
Inlnnd 
aparatlaee 
1 
«4 
44 
4 
-4 
of 
.11 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no I 
m 
m» 
9 
4J s o T-
IS . 
no 
no 
no 
no 
no 
(A) In some cases, the consortium would neve the authority to price-fix but the "no" re fleet a that it doom not mo. 
.zs. 
ANNEX II 
List of consortia aereement* rocoivd bv tho CcMnmisgion 
ANZECS 
BEACON 
CAROL Operating Agreement 
(these three agreements submitted by CAACE in 1987) 
ACL 
Bean Carriers 
Scan Dutch 
(these three agreements submitted by their representatives in 1988) 
TRIO 
Nedscans Letter of Intent 
Johnson ScanStar 
EUROSAL 
Swedish Orient Line Agreement 
West Coast UK Arab Service Operating Agreement 
Stresmlin* Joint Liner Service Agreement 
Canada Maritime Slot Charter Agreement 
COSEUA Common Services 
S.C.A.D.O.A. - Service Commun d'Armements Desservant l'Ouest Africa: 
Joint Container Service Europe - East Coast South America 
COBRA Operating Agreement (covering Phase I) 
Fed Sec Express Service (former CAMEL Merzario) 
<all these agreements submitted by CAACE in 1989) 
CAROL Lines Joint Service Agreement 
Trans Freight Lines Joint Venture Agreement 
Pacific Europe Express Joint Service Agreement 
Italia - d'Amico Joint Service Agreement 
(these four agreements received from the Federal Maritime Commissio 
Washington D.C.) 
(MULTIPLE MEMBERSHIPS OF LINES/CONSORTIA/CONFERENCES) 
FAR EASTERN FREIGHT CONFERENCE 
OMEX SCANOUTCH TRIO ACE MEO CLUB 
Cho Yang Shipping (SKO) CGM (F) 
NOL (Sing) Nedlloyd (ML) 
OOCL (H.K.) East Asiatic (DK) 
WilheUsen (N) PftOCL (UK) 
Ben Line (UK) 
Hapag Lloyd (0) 
NYK (J) 
Swedish Transocean (S) Mitsui OSK (J) NOL (Sing) 
OOCL (UK) 
Korea Shipp. Corp. (SKO) 
Cho Yang Shipp. (SKO) 
Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha (J) ? (F) 
Lloyd Triestino (I) 
NOL (Sing.) 
NYK (J) 
OMEX 
(Taiwan, Hong Kong, 
Singapore, South Korea) 
z 
'n 
(MULTIPLE MEMBERSHIP LINES/COMSORTIA/CONFEIcEMCES) 
MEUSARA / USANERA 
US/EUROPE RATE AGREEMENTS 
ACL Pacif. Eurax. 
Express JS/HL/PEX SAGUNEX 
Swedish Trans 
Vatlènius 
Cunard*(tjK) NEW ? Johnson Scanstar 
Blue Star (UK) 
East Asiatic (DIC) 
Johnson Line (S) 
CTE (Ê) 
CONFERENCE 
ASSOCIATION OF WEST INDIA TRANSATLANTIC STEAMSHIP LINES 
W.l.T.A.S.S. 
CAROL! EURO-CARIBE SAC 
Coapagnie 
Générale Naritiae 
(F) 
Charente Steanship Co. 
(UK) Hapag Lloyd 
(0) edlloyd 
(NL) 
Nicaragua 
Nat. Line (Nicar.) STREAMLINE 
Johnson Line 
Firm carriers (Fine) 
Royal Mail Lines (UK) 
Flomerca (Guatemala) is 
4L*-ANNEX IV 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No QL. 
On the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to certain catégories 
of agreements, decisions and concerted practices between shipping 
companies. 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community, and in particular Article 87 thereof, 
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission , 
2 Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament , 
Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee", 
Whereas Article 85(1) of the Treaty may in accordance with Article 
85(3) be declared inapplicable to categorj.es of agreements, decisions 
and concerted practices which fulfil the conditions contained in 
Article 85(3); 
Whereas the provisions for the application of Article 85(3) should be 
adopted by way of Regulation pursuant to Article 87; whereas, according 
to Article 87(2)(b), such a Regulation must lay down detailed rules for 
the application of Article 85(3), taking into account the need to 
ensure effective supervision, on the one hand, and to simplify 
administration to the greatest possible extent on the other; whereas, 
according to Article 87(2)(d), such a Regulation is required to define 
the respective functions of the Commission and of the Court of Justice; 
1O.J. 
2O.J. 
3O.J. 
Whereas liner shipping is a capital intensive industry; whereas 
containerization has increasest pressures for co-operation and 
rationalisation; whereas the Community shipping industry neods to 
attain the necessary economies of scale in order to compete 
successfully on the world liner shipping market; 
Whereas joint service agreements between liner shipping companies with 
the aim of rationalising their operations by means of technical, 
operational and/or commercial arrangements (described in shipping 
circles as consortia) can help to provide the necessary means for 
improving the productivity of liner shipping services and promoting 
technical and economic progress; 
Whereas users of the shipping services offered by consortia can obtain 
a share of the benefits resulting from the improvements in productivity 
and service, by means of, inter alia, regularity, cost reductions 
derived from higher levels of capacity utilization, better service 
quality stemming from improved vessels and equipment, and efficient 
door-to-door transport; 
Whereas most consortia deal with multi-modal transport operations which 
L 
fall partly within the scope of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86 
5 and partly under Council Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 and, insofar as 
containers are concerned, partly under Regulation No 17/62 of the 
Council ; 
Whereas the Commission should be enabled to declare by way of 
regulation that the provisions of Article 85(1) do not apply to certain 
categories of consortia agreements, decisions and concerted practices, 
A0.J. No L378, 31.12.1986, p. A. 
5O.J. No L175, 23.7.1968, p. 1; (Special edition 1968 I, p. 302). 
6O.J. No 13, 21.2.1962, p. 204/62; (Special edition 1959-1962, p. 87) 
- 31-
in order to make it easier for undertakings to cooperate in ways which 
are economically desirable and without adverse effect from the point of 
view of competition policy; 
Whereas the Commission, in close and constant liaison with the 
competent authorities of the Member States, should be able to define 
precisely the scope of these exemptions and the conditions attached to 
them; 
Whereas consortia in liner shipping are a specialized and complex type 
of joint venture; whereas there is a great variety of different 
consortia agreements operating in different circumstances; whereas the 
scope, parties, activities or terms of consortia are frequently 
altered; whereas the Commission should therefore be given the 
responsibility of defining from time to time the consortia to which the 
group exemption should apply; 
Whereas, in order to ensure that all the conditions of Article 85(3) 
are met it would be necessary to attach to the block exemption 
conditions to ensure in particular that a fair share of the benefits 
would be passed on to shippers and that competition is not eliminated; 
Whereas under Article 11(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4856/86, 
Article 11(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68, and Article 6 of 
Regulation No 17 of the Council, the Commission may provide that a 
decision taken in accordance with Article 85(3) of the Treaty shall 
apply with retroactive effect; whereas it is desirable that the 
Commission be empowered to adopt, by regulation, provisions to the like 
effect; 
Whereas notification of agreements, decisions and concerted practices 
falling within the scope of this regulation shall not be made 
compulsory, being primarily the responsability of undertakings to see 
to it that they conform to the rules on competition, and in particular 
to the conditions laid down by regulation concerning liner shipping 
consortia; 
-iV 
Whereas there can be no exemption if the conditions set out in Article 
85(3) are not satisfied; whereas the Commission should therefore have 
power to take the appropriate measures where an agreement proves to 
have effects incompatible with Article 85(3); whereas the Commission 
should consequently be able first to address recommendations to the 
parties and then to take decisions; 
HA8 ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 
ARTICLE 1 
1. Without prejudice to the applications of Regulation (EEC) No 
4056/86, Regulation (EEC) No 1017/68 and Regulation No 17, the 
Commission may, by regulation and in accordance with Article 85(3) 
of the Treaty, declare that Article 85(1) shall not apply to 
categories of agreements between undertakings, decisions of 
associations of undertakings and concerted practices that have as 
their object to promote or establish cooperation in the joint 
operation of maritime transport services or of combined maritime and 
land transport services. 
2. Such regulation shall define the categories of agreements, decisions 
and concerted practices to which it applies and shall specify the 
conditions and obligations under which, pursuant to Article 85(3) of 
the Treaty, they shall be considered exempted from the application 
of Article 85(1) of the Treaty. 
ARTICLE 2 
1. The Regulation pursuant to Article 1 shall be made for a specified 
period. 
2. It may be repealed or amended where circumstances have changed with 
respect to any of the facts which were basic to its being made. 
•& 
ARTICLE 3 
The regulation adopted pursuant to Article 1 may include a provision 
t!-;.-ii- i! r»pp1if>'-. with retroactive effect to agreement?, <W- j'-,ior/. ."wl 
c-ricerted practices which were in existence at the date of •••ntry into 
force of such regulation, provided they comply with the conditions 
established therein. 
ARTICLE 4 
Before adopting the regulation, the Commission shall publish a draft 
thereof to enable all persons and organizations concerned to submit 
their comments within such reasonable time limit, being not less than 
one month, as the Commission shall fix. 
ARTICLE 5 
1. Before publishing the draft regulation and before adopting the 
regulation the Commission shall consult: 
a) The Advisory Committee on Agreements and Dominant Position in 
Maritime Transport established by Article 15(3) of Regulation 
(EEC) No 4056/86; 
b) the Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Monopolies in 
the Transport Industry established by Article 16(3) of Regulation 
(EEC) No 1017/68; 
c) the Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Monopolies 
established by Article 10(3) of Regulation 17. 
2. Paragraphs 5 and 6 of said provisions, relating to consultation with 
the Advisory Committees, shall apply, it being understood that joint 
meetings with the Commission shall take place not earlier than one 
month after dispatch of the notice convening them. 
ZH 
ARTICLE 6 
1. Where the persons concerned are in breach of a condition or 
obligation which attaches to an exemption granted by the Regulation 
adopted pursuant to Article 1. the Commission may, in order to put 
an end to such a breach: 
- address recommendations to the persons concerned, and 
- in the event of failure by such persons to observe those 
recommendations, and depending on the gravity of the breach 
concerned, adopt a decision that either prohibits them from 
carrying out, or requires them to perform, specific acts or, while 
withdrawing the benefit of the block exemption which they enjoyed, 
grants them an individual exemption in accordance with Article 
11(4) of Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, Article 11(4) of Regulation 
(EEC) No 1017/68 and Article 6 of Regulation No 17, as 
appropriate, or withdraws the benefit.of the block exemption which 
they enjoyed. 
2. Where the Commission, either on its own initiative or at the request 
of a Member State or of natural or legal persons claiming a 
legitimate interest, finds that in any particular case an agreement, 
decision or concerted practice to which the block exemption granted 
by the regulation adopted pursuant to Article 1 applies, 
nevertheless has effects which are incompatible with Article 85(3) 
or are prohibited by Article 86, it may withdraw the benefit of the 
block exemption from those agreements, decisions or concerted 
practices and take all appropriate measures for the purpose of 
bringing these infringements to an end, pursuant to Article 13 of 
Regulation (EEC) No 4056/86, Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 
1017/68 and Article 8 of Regulation No 17, as appropriate. 
3. Before taking a decision under paragraph 2, the Commission may 
address recommendations for termination of the infringement to the 
persons concerned. 
3s: 
ARTICLE 7 
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its 
publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. 
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly 
applicable in all Member States. 
Done at Brussels, 
For the Council 
The President 
t 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(90) 260 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 07 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-90-287-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-61376-9 
PRICE 1 - 30 pages: 3J0 ECU per additional 10 pages: 1.25 ECU 
Office for Officiai Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg