Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions meeting on 6 March 2017 concerning a draft decision relating to case AT.39258 — Airfreight — Rapporteur: Finland
Date: 2017-03-06
Institutions: Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions
Subjects: EU competition policy, additional duty, air transport, carriage of goods, cartel, control of restrictive practices, international cartel, restriction on competition, sanction (EU)








C_2017188EN.01000901.xml










14.6.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 188/9





Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions meeting on 6 March 2017 concerning a draft decision relating to case AT.39258 — Airfreight
Rapporteur: Finland
(2017/C 188/09)






1.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that it is legally possible to re-adopt a new decision in this case following the (partial) annulment of the 2010 Decision by the Court.










2.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that Articles 5(j) to 5(l) of the 2010 Decision are repealed and re-adopted.










3.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the draft decision applies to British Airways plc in so far as the judgment of the General Court in Case T-48/11 of 16 December 2015 annulled the 2010 Decision.










4.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practice between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Swiss Agreement.










5.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the undertakings’ behaviour and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practice contained in the draft decision.










6.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Swiss Agreement.










7.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practice was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Swiss Agreement.










8.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practice were capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU.










9.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringement.










10.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s draft decision as regards the addressees.










11.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that a fine should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision.










12.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003.










13.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the basic amounts of the fines.










14.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the duration for the purpose of calculating the fines.










15.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the application of the specific aggravating and mitigating circumstances in this case.










16.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the determination of the fine for the two undertakings whose adjusted basic amount exceeds 10 % of their total turnover.










17.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission as regards the treatment of the leniency applications and the reduction of the fines based on the 2006 Leniency Notice.










18.


The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.










19.


The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.