Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/36.264 — Mercedes, pursuant to Article 15 of Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)
Date: 2001-09-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: audit, competition law, dominant position, motor vehicle industry, report, restriction on competition

C 228/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.9.2002

— the stamp used to endorse the document does not match

19. EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR ARTICLES 16 AND 32

that which has been notified.

Action to be taken:

is sent

The document
to the issuing authorities for post-
clearance verification, with a statement of the reasons for the
request for verification. Pending the results of this verification,
all appropriate steps judged necessary by the customs auth-
orities shall be taken to secure payment of any applicable
duties.

18. ANNEX I — INTRODUCTORY NOTE 6, POINT 6(1)

The special rule for textile materials excludes linings and inter-
linings. The ‘pocketing fabric’ is a special woven fabric that is
the production of pockets and can
exclusively used for
therefore not be considered as normal
lining or interlining.
The special rule applies therefore to ‘pocketing fabric’. The
rule applies to woven fabrics in the piece as well as to
finished pockets originating in third countries.

DA

DE

EL

EN

ES

FI

FR

IT

NL

PT

SV

AFVIST DOKUMENT

UANVENDELIGT

DOKUMENT NICHT
ANGENOMMEN

NICHT ANWENDBAR

ΑΠΟΡΡΙΠΤΕΤΑΙ

ΜΗ ΑΠΟ∆ΕΚΤΟ

DOCUMENT NOT ACCEPTED

INAPPLICABLE

DOCUMENTO RECHAZADO

INAPLICABLE

ASIAKIRJA HYLÄTTY

EI VOIDA KÄYTTÄÄ

DOCUMENT REFUSÉ

INAPPLICABLE

DOCUMENTO RESPINTO

INAPPLICABILE

DOCUMENT GEWEIGERD

NIET VAN TOEPASSING

DOCUMENTO RECUSADO

NÃO APLICÁVEL

EJ GODTAGET DOKUMENT

OANVÄNDBART

Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/36.264 — Mercedes, pursuant to Article 15 of
Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing
Officers in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(2002/C 228/03)

The draft Decision gives rise to the following obsevations regarding the right to be heard.

There were no procedural problems. The Statement of Objections was sent to the undertaking concerned,
DaimlerChrysler AG, on 31 March 1999. The undertaking replied by letter of 14 June 1999. The Oral
Hearing took place on 29 June 1999.

The rather long duration of the procedure is mainly due to the fact that the undertaking concerned was
afforded the opportunity of submitting several additional comments in writing after the Oral Hearing. On
7 December 1999 DaimlerChrysler AG presented a legal expert's report which analysed in detail the main
question of the case, namely the application of Article 81 to the distribution of motor vehicles via a
network of commercial agents. A further written submission from the undertaking was received by the
Commission on 4 September 2000 after the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities in the Volkswagen AG case. The draft Decision to be submitted to the Advisory Committee
on restrictive practices and monopolies was drafted by mid-2001 after all of DaimlerChrysler AG's
submissions had been analysed.

It follows from the above observations that the rights of defence have been fully respected. The draft
Decision deals only with objections in respect of which DaimlerChrysler AG has been afforded the
opportunity of making known its views.

Done at Brussels on 4 September 2001.

Helmuth SCHRÖTER