Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/5 |

---

Final report of the hearing officer in case COMP/M.3099 — Areva/Urenco

(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](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:L:2001:162:TOC))

(2006/C 52/05)

On 8 and 26 April 2004, the Commission received a joint referral request from the authorities of France, Sweden and Germany, pursuant to Article 22 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (the ‘Merger Regulation’), to investigate a proposed concentration by which the undertaking Société de participations du Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique SA (‘Areva’), acquires within the meaning of Article 3 (1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the undertaking Enrichment Technology Company Limited (‘ETC’), formerly solely controlled by the undertaking Urenco Limited (‘Urenco’), by way of purchase of shares.

Upon examination of the evidence submitted by the referring Member States and the parties to the proposed concentration and after conducting a market investigation, the Commission concluded that the concentration raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market and decided to initiate proceedings under Article 6 (1)(c) of the Merger Regulation on 22 June 2004.

Upon the parties' request of 22 June 2004, a review of key documents was provided in accordance with the best practices on the conduct of EC merger control proceedings on 14 July 2004.

On 20 August 2004 the parties offered commitments that modified the original concentration plan, some aspects of which were amended following the market test conducted by the Commission. Final commitments were submitted on 3 September 2004. On the basis of these undertakings the relevant Commission service considered that the serious doubts had been removed. Accordingly no statement of objections was sent to the parties. No queries were raised before the Hearing Officer by the parties or other companies as to the market test. The case does not call for any particular comments as regards the right to be heard.

Brussels, 27 September 2004.

Karen WILLIAMS

---

[Top](#document1)