EN Official Journal of the European Union C 327/3

Final Report of the Hearing Officer (1)

Container Shipping

(AT.39850)

(2016/C 327/03)

(1) This case concerns a practice whereby the addressees (‘the Parties’) (2) of the draft decision have been publicly announcing their intended future increases of container liner shipping prices on different channels.

(2) On 21 November 2013 and on 13 November 2015, the European Commission (the ‘Commission’) initiated proceedings against the Parties within the meaning of Article 11(6) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 (3) and Article 2(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 (4).

(3) On 26 November 2015, the Commission adopted a Preliminary Assessment pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, expressing its concern that the Parties' practice of publicly announcing their intended price increases may allow them to exchange information on the future pricing intentions and thus may have the object of restricting competition on the market for container shipping transport services on routes to and from the European Economic Area (‘EEA’), in violation of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

(4) Between 21 December 2015 and 12 February 2016 the Parties submitted commitments to the Commission in response to the Preliminary Assessment of 26 November 2015.

(5) On 16 February 2016 the Commission published a Communication in the Official Journal of the European Union pursuant to Article 27(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, summarising the case and the commitments submitted by the Parties, and inviting interested third parties to submit observations within one month of this publication (5). A total of 4 substantive responses were received. The Commission considered that the responses did not give rise to new concerns. In view of the market test, the Commission maintained its position that the commitments are adequate to address its competition concerns, as expressed in the Preliminary Assessment. The Parties were informed thereof.

(6) The draft decision makes the commitments binding upon the Parties, and concludes that in light of these, there are no longer grounds for action on its part, and thus the proceedings in this case should be brought to an end.

(7) I have not received any request or complaint from any party to the proceedings with respect to the submitted commitments (6).

(8) 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 parties have been afforded the opportunity of making known their views, and I have come to a positive conclusion.

(9) In conclusion, I consider that the effective exercise of the procedural rights has been respected in this case.

Brussels, 28 June 2016. 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) (‘Decision 2011/695/EU’).

(2) Mentioned in Article 3 of the Decision.

(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (OJ L 1, 4.1.2003, p. 1).

(4) 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).

(5) OJ C 60, 16.2.2016, p. 7.

(6) According to Article 15(1) of Decision 2011/695/EU, parties to the proceedings offering commitments pursuant to Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 may call upon the hearing officer at any stage of the procedure in order to ensure the effective exercise of their procedural rights.