UNIE ( UA' ( SU ) WAS NOT A LEGAL ENTITY DURING PART OF THE PERIOD TO WHICH THIS COMPLAINT REFERS
75 I - SU SUBMITS THAT IT ONLY COMMENCED BUSINESS ON 2 JANUARY 1971 SO THAT THERE IS NO FOUNDATION FOR THE FINDING IN THE DECISION THAT THE APPLICANT COMMITTED INFRINGEMENTS 'FROM THE 1968/69 MARKETING YEAR '.
76 SIMILARLY THE COMMISSION INFRINGED REGULATION NO 17, AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 15 ( 2 ) THEREOF, BY IMPOSING ON THE APPLICANT A FINE FOR AN INFRINGEMENT WHICH IT COULD NOT HAVE COMMITTED DURING MOST OF THE PERIOD UNDER CONSIDERATION .
77 THE COURT FILE SHOWS THAT IN 1966 FOUR NETHERLANDS SUGAR PRODUCING COOPERATIVES, THE MEMBERS OF WHICH WERE BEET GROWERS, FORMED AN ASSOCIATION KNOWN AS 'COOPERATIEVE VERENIGING SUIKER UNIE UA', HEREINAFTER CALLED 'THE FORMER ASSOCIATION', HAVING AS ITS OBJECT, IN PARTICULAR, THE COORDINATION OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE SAID COOPERATIVES WHICH HAD TO CARRY OUT THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE ASSOCIATION, ESPECIALLY FOR MAKING THE BEST POSSIBLE USE OF PLANT, INVESTMENTS AND PRICES .
78 PROMPTED BY THE WISH TO ATTAIN CLOSER COOPERATION AMOUNTING TO AN ACTUAL MERGER THE FOUR COOPERATIVES FORMED ON 16 JULY 1970 A COMPANY ALSO CALLED 'COOPERATIEVE VERENIGING SUIKER UNIE UA', WHICH BROUGHT TOGETHER UNDER ITS WING THE MEMBERS OF THE SAID COOPERATIVES AS DIRECT PARTICIPATORS, COMMENCED BUSINESS ON 1 JANUARY 1971 AND IS THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE .
79 AFTER THE FORMER ASSOCIATION HAD CHANGED ITS NAME TO 'COOPERATIEVE VERENIGING SUIKER UNIE BEHEER UA', IT CEASED TRADING WHEN THE APPLICANT COMMENCED BUSINESS AND WAS DISSOLVED WITH EFFECT FROM 1 JUNE 1971 .
80 THE FOUR COOPERATIVES WHICH WERE MEMBERS OF THE FORMER ASSOCIATION WERE DISSOLVED ON 31 DECEMBER 1970 AND ON 1 JANUARY 1971 THE APPLICANT ASSUMED ALL THEIR RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES .
81 THE APPLICANT STATES THAT IT CANNOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTS AND THINGS DONE BY THE FORMER ASSOCIATION WHICH IS NOT ITS PREDECESSOR (' RECHTSVOORGANGER ') AND WHICH HAD NEITHER ANY GOODWILL NOR ANY ASSETS WHICH IT COULD HAVE TRANSFERRED TO THE APPLICANT, QUITE APART FROM THE FACT THAT A TRANSFER OF GOODWILL IS NOT KNOWN IN NETHERLANDS LAW .
82 THE APPLICANT IS ONLY THE LEGAL AND ECONOMIC SUCCESSOR OF THE FOUR COOPERATIVES, THE NAMES OF WHICH MOREOVER NEVER INCLUDED THE WORDS 'SUIKER UNIE '.
83 EVEN IF IT MUST BE TREATED AS THE LEGAL SUCCESSOR OF THE FORMER ASSOCIATION, THERE IS A CASE FOR TAKING ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THIS ASSOCIATION WAS NOT LIABLE FOR THE OBLIGATIONS ARISING OUT OF THE DECISION, WHICH WERE THE DIRECT LIABILITY OF SU .
84 II - AS THE APPLICANT ASSUMED ALL THE RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES OF THE FOUR COOPERATIVES OF THE OLD ASSOCIATION, IT MUST BE TREATED AS THE ECONOMIC SUCCESSOR BOTH OF THE OLD ASSOCIATION AND OF ITS MEMBERS, WHICH INDEED IS WHAT THOSE MEMBERS INTENDED .
85 THE APPLICANT MOREOVER DOES NOT DENY THAT THE NAME 'SUIKER UNIE' ALWAYS COVERED THE SAME UNDERTAKINGS, WHICH WERE RUN FOR THE MOST PART