TAKEN PART .
239 THESE ARGUMENTS WHICH ARE DESIGNED BY THE APPLICANT TO PERSUADE THE COURT THAT THE COMMISSION HAS NOT PROVED THE INFRINGEMENT FOR WHICH IT IS BLAMED ARE PART OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE .
SECTION 2 : SUBMISSION ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE THAT ARTICLE 85 OF THE TREATY HAS BEEN INFRINGED
240 THE ESSENCE OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF RT AND PFEIFER UND LANGEN IS THAT, SINCE THERE WAS NO CONCERTED ACTION, THE COURSES OF CONDUCT FOR WHICH THE APPLICANTS ARE BLAMED, TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THEY WERE IN FACT ADOPTED, DID NOT AMOUNT TO CONCERTED PRACTICES, SO THAT THE COMMISSION, BY APPLYING ARTICLE 85 OF THE TREATY TO THESE COURSES OF CONDUCT, INFRINGED THIS PROVISION .
I - SUMMARY OF THE RELEVANT STATEMENTS OF THE DECISION
241 THE PRACTICES FOR WHICH THE APPLICANTS ARE BLAMED ARE MADE UP OF FOUR GROUPS OF ACTIONS OR OMISSIONS .
242 THEY ARE FIRST OF ALL BLAMED FOR HAVING CHANNELLED MOST OF THE EXPORTS OF WHITE SUGAR COMING FROM THE RT GROUP INTO THE WESTERN PART OF GERMANY TO SPECIFIC CONSIGNEES, NAMELY PFEIFER UND LANGEN OR, FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES, NAMELY DENATURING OR SUBSEQUENT EXPORT TO THIRD COUNTRIES .
243 WITH REGARD TO THE RELATIVELY SMALL VOLUME OF BELGIAN EXPORTS TO THE BEFOREMENTIONED REGION, WHICH WERE NOT CHANNELLED IN THIS WAY, THE RT GROUP IS BLAMED FOR HAVING COMPELLED BELGIAN DEALERS, AND IN PARTICULAR EXPORT, ONLY TO UNDERTAKE SUCH EXPORTS WITH PFEIFER UND LANGEN'S CONSENT OR BY APPLYING A PRICE ALIGNED ON THE GERMAN COMPANY'S PRICE .
244 FURTHER RT INSTRUCTED EXPORT TO REFUSE, OPENLY OR COVERTLY, OFFERS FROM GERMAN NON-PRODUCERS WISHING TO IMPORT BELGIAN SUGAR .
245 FINALLY, THE BELGIAN COMPANY SUPPLIED PFEIFER UND LANGEN WITH VERY LARGE QUANTITIES OF RAW SUGAR INSTEAD OF REFINING IT ITSELF AND EXPORTING THE WHITE SUGAR REFINED IN THIS WAY TO THE GERMAN FIRM'S SALES AREA .
II - EXAMINATION OF THE SUBMISSION
1 . WHITE SUGAR
A - THE EVIDENCE
( A ) THE EVIDENCE OF THE ACTUAL CONDUCT OF THE APPLICANTS
( AA ) CHANNELLING OF BELGIAN EXPORTS TO SPECIFIC CONSIGNEES OR PARTICULAR DESTINATIONS
246 1 . SEVERAL CONFIRMATIONS OF PURCHASES BY EXPORT OR HOTTLET EITHER TO RT OR TO OTHER BELGIAN PRODUCERS ( ANNEXES II 28, 35 TO THE STATEMENT OF DEFENCE IN CASE 47/73 ) SHOW THAT THESE DEALERS UNDERTOOK ONLY TO RESELL THE SUGAR PURCHASED UNDER THESE TRANSACTIONS FOR DENATURING .
247 RT, IN A LETTER OF 24 JULY 1969 TO EXPORT ( ANNEX I 43 TO THE STATEMENTS OF DEFENCE ) - AFTER CONFIRMING THAT BELGIAN SUGAR IS AT THE PRESENT TIME EXPORTED TO GERMANY FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION WHEREAS IT WAS ORIGINALLY SOLD FOR DENATURING - STATES THAT 'THESE DELIVERIES FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION ... ARE ONLY POSSIBLE AT PRICES LESS THAN THOSE FOR WHICH GERMAN PRODUCERS ASK; THE LATTER CONSEQUENTLY DEEPLY DEPLORE THE PRESSURE BROUGHT TO BEAR ON THEIR MARKET BY BELGIAN SUGAR', AND GOES ON TO SAY : 'HAVING INFORMED YOU EARLIER OF OUR