CORPORATION
JAPAN :
MITSUBISHI
TOSHIBA
MIEDENSHA
TOYO DENKI
HITACHI
UNITED KINGDOM :
VACUUM INTERRUPTERS LTD .
( D ) THERE IS NO REAL VACUUM INTERRUPTER MARKET YET IN THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EEC BECAUSE SWITCHGEAR , INCORPORATING VACUUM INTERRUPTERS LTD TYPE VACUUM INTERRUPTERS , IS STILL IN THE DEVELOPMENT STAGE . THE SALES WHICH HAVE TAKEN PLACE TO CUSTOMERS WITHIN THE MEMBER STATES HAVE BEEN APPARENTLY FOR EXPERIMENTAL PURPOSES ONLY ( SEVEN VACUUM INTERRUPTERS TO TWO SEPARATE CUSTOMERS IN WEST GERMANY ) . THE PROSPECTS FOR FUTURE SALES ARE DEPENDENT ON THE SUCCESSFUL DEVELOPMENT OF THIS TYPE OF INTERRUPTER AND , IN PARTICULAR , THE INCREASING OF THE POWER CAPACITY WHICH THEY CAN HANDLE . ALL THE INDICATIONS ARE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE SUCCESSFUL , AND THAT EXPORTS TO OTHER COUNTRIES WITHIN THE EEC WILL EXPAND . THERE HAS BEEN A STEADY EXPANSION IN DEMAND FOR THE VACUUM INTERRUPTER IN BOTH THE UNITED STATES AND JAPAN AND THERE IS NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT A SIMILAR EXPANSION WILL NOT OCCUR WHEN THE MANUFACTURERS OF SWITCHGEAR WITHIN THE EEC DEVELOP EQUIPMENT TO INCORPORATE THE VACUUM INTERRUPTER .
( E ) ASSOCIATED ELECTRICAL INDUSTRIES LTD , THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL THE GENERAL ELECTRIC CO . LTD , HAS MANY CUSTOMERS FOR SWITCHGEAR APPARATUS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND IN THE OTHER MEMBER STATES OF THE EEC . REYROLLE PARSONS LTD HAVE NOT HAD CUSTOMERS FOR SWITCHGEAR APPARATUS IN ANY EEC MEMBER STATE OTHER THAN THE UNITED KINGDOM . THE BUSINESS OF BOTH COMPANIES IS MAINLY WITH LARGE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKINGS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND IN PARTICULAR WITH THE CENTRAL ELECTRICITY GENERATING BOARD AND OTHER ELECTRICITY BOARDS , TO WHICH BOTH ARE THE MAIN SUPPLIERS OF SWITCHGEAR EQUIPMENT .
THE COST OF THE VACUUM INTERRUPTER UNIT IS A VERY MINOR PART OF THE COST OF SWITCHGEAR .
14 . VACUUM INTERRUPTERS LTD SUBMITTED THE NOTIFICATION OF THE AGREEMENT OF 25 MARCH 1970 AND THE AMENDING AGREEMENTS OF 17 NOVEMBER 1972 AND THE TWO FURTHER AGREEMENTS OF 24 NOVEMBER 1972 ON 28 JUNE 1973 . THE COMMISSION HAVE CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN AND ORAL SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AND HAVE INVESTIGATED THE MATTER , AS A RESULT OF WHICH IT APPEARED THAT THIS WAS A CASE IN WHICH A FAVOURABLE DECISION WAS PROBABLE . FOR THIS REASON , A NOTICE SUMMARIZING THE FACTS AND INVITING COMMENTS FROM ANY INTERESTED THIRD PARTY WAS PUBLISHED ON 4 AUGUST 1976 IN THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 19 ( 3 ) OF REGULATION NO 17 . NO COMMENTS OR OBJECTIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM ANY THIRD PARTY FOLLOWING THAT PUBLICATION .
II . APPLICABILITY OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) OF THE TREATY
BY VIRTUE OF THE PROVISION OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) OF THE TREATY , ALL AGREEMENTS BETWEEN UNDERTAKINGS AND CONCERTED PRACTICES WHICH MAY AFFECT TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES AND WHICH HAVE AS THEIR OBJECT OR EFFECT THE PREVENTION , RESTRICTION OR DISTORTION OF COMPETITION WITHIN THE