natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr.2352197af 27.II.t997 om sarlige foranstaltningerfor indfsrsel af ris med oprindelse i OLT (EFT L 326, s.2l\.
The fundamental issue, which had not been analysedin detail by the Court of Justice in its judgment, was whether Article 85(1) of the Treaty was incorrectlyapplied in the Commission decision, in that, in the absence of autonomousconduct on the part of the CNSD and its members, adoption of the tariff at issuedid not constitute a decision by an association of undertakings within the meaningof Article 85.
Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr. 2494197 af 12.12.L997 om udstedelse af importlicenser for ris henhsrende under KN-kode 1006med oprindelse i OLT som ledi de srerlige foranstaltninger, der blev indfsrt ved Kommissionens forordning (EF) nr.2352./97 (EFT L 343, s. 17).
Since such a body had room for manoeuvre in performing theobligations imposed on it by the national legislation, within which it could andought to have acted in such a way as not to restrict the existing level ofcompetition, the restrictive effects on competition of a tariff set by it could arise from its conduct.
I en af de sager, der blev afgjort ved ovennaevnte dom af 8. juni 2000 , Camarog Tico mod Kommissionen, havde sagsogerne nedlagt pästand om annullation af Kommissionens afslag pä sagsogernes ansogning om, at et toldkontingentblev revideret.Da der var tale om en beslutning om ikke at foretage sig noget,henviste Retten til, at et afslag er en retsakt, som kan g6restil genstand for etannullationssogsmäl, när den retsakt, som institutionen afslär at udstede, kunnehave varet anfegtet i henhold til traktatens artikel 173.
On 30 November 1994 the Commission adopted a decision, addressed to 42undertakings and associations of undertakings, in which it found that there hadbeen a series of agreements and concerted practices aimed at sharingthe Europeanmarkets in white cement and in grey cement.
Da Kommissionensbeslutning om ikke at foretage sig noget i den foreliggende sag vedrsrtevedtagelsen af en forordning, undersogte Retten, om sagsogerne varumiddelbart og individuelt bersrt af forordningen.Ved antagelsen af sagen tilrealitetsbehandling anferte Retten, at sagssgerne som nogle af de storsteimportorer af den vare, som var bersrt af kontingentet,var bersrt af Kommissionens afslag pä grund af en faktisk situation, som karakteriserededem i forhold til alle andre erhvervsdrivende, der drev virksomhed pä sarnme marked.
According to the Commission,those agreements and practices constituted a single infringement in which the 42addressees of the decision had participated and whose starting point was January1983: then, the representatives of the European cement producers, members of Cembureau (the professional association of European cement manufacturers), metand entered into an agreement which was designed to ensurenon-transhipment tohome markets and prohibited any export of cement within Europe likely todestabilise the neighbouringmarkets. It was found in Article 1 of the contesteddecision that that agreement, called "the Cembureau agreement", existed and that
Retten fastslog, atden spanske sammenslutning af godstransportvirksomheder (CETM), for sävidt som denvaretog interesserne for de medlemmer, der havde modtaget den
Council Regulation (EEC) No 3975/87of 14 December 1987 laying down the procedurefor the application of the rules on competition to undertakings in the air transport sector
Afgorelse 9Ll482lEgF om de overssiske landes og territoriers associering med Det Europeiske Okonomiske Frellesskab (EFT L263, s. I).
Regulation No 141 of the Council exempting transport from the application of Council Regulation No 17 (OJ, English Special Edition 1959-62,p.2a[. p.2a[.
pägeldende ststte og skulle tilbagebetaleden i medfsr af den anfregtedebeslutning, kun kunne anlegge sag med pästand om annullation af beslutningen, for sä vidt som beslutningen vedrsrte virksomheder, der varmedlemmer af CETM, og hvis hovedaktivitet bestod i vejgodstransport.
all the undertakings and associations of undertakings to which the decision wasaddressed participated in it, in breach of the prohibition laid down in Article 85(1)of the Treaty.
Pä antidumpingomrädet skulle Retten undersoge en rakke formalitetsindsigelser vedrsrende manglende sogsmälsberettigelse i flere sagerangäende pästand om annullation af forordninger.
The Cembureau agreement was describedin the contested decisionas a single and continuous agreement, in that it was implemented in theframework of bilateral or multilateral agreements and concertedpractices.
Aftrrengigtaf den konkrete sag blev de enten afuist (dom af 29.6.2000, sag T7 199, Medici Grimmmod Rädet, Srnl.
It wasfound in Articles 2 to 6 of the contested decision that those agreements and concerted practices existed and that the various undertakings and associations ofundertakings participated in them. t2 However, the date on which the infringement ceasedwas uncertain.
II, s. 267I, og af 26.9.2000, sag T-80197, Starway mod Rädet,endnuikke trykt i Samling af Afgarelser) eller antagettil realitetsbehandling(dom af 26.9.2000, sag T-74197 og T-75197,Fahrzeugteilefabrik mod Rädetog Kommissionen, endnu ikke trykt i Samling af Afgorelser).
Fines amounting overall to approximatelyEUR 250 000 000 were imposed on the addressees of the decision.
L. Konkurrenceregler for virksomheder
Before the Court, all the applicants denied that they had participated in theagreement referred to in Article I of the contested decision.
Retspraksis vedrorende konkurrenceregler for virksomheder er kun blevet foroget med domme om anvendelse af reglerne i EF-traktaten.Ved en enkelt
The Court found,after consideration of the documents mentioned in the decision, that the Commission had proved the existence of the Cembureau agreement and that therehad in fact been an agreement between all the applicant undertakings on non-transhipment to home markets.
8 blev 41 dom af 15. marts 2000 i Cement-sagerne (herefter cement-dommen sagerafgjort. Cement-dommens bidrag til retspraksis er omfattende og kan kun i saerdeles begrrenset omfang gengivesher i ärsrapporten.
In that context, the Court provided some clarification on the standard of proofrequired in order to establish that an undertaking has participated in an agreementor concerted practice.
Der er igennem retspraksis i lsbet af 2000 sket en afklaringaf sporgsmäl indenfor meget forskellige omräder: anvendelsesomrädet for de fellesskabsretligekonkurrenceregler, aftaler i strid med EF-traktatens artikel 85 (nu artikel 81EF), misbrug af dominerende stitling i strid med traktatens artikel 86,overholdelse af retten til kontradiktion, behandling af klager angäende disse tobestemmelser og fastsettelse af sanktioner.
It indicatedthat where an undertaking or an association ofundertakings has, even without playing an active role, participated in one or moremeetings at which a concurrenceof wills emerged or was confirmed on theprinciple of anti-competitive conduct and it has, by virtue of its presence,subscribed to or at least given the impression to the other participants that itsubscribed to the subjectmatter of the anti-competitive agreement which wasconcluded and subsequently confirmed at those meetings, it must, unless it proves
Dom af 15.3.2000 i de forenede sager T-25195, T-26195, T'30/95, T-31195,T-32195,T-34195 - T-3glg5,T-42195 - T-46195, T-48195, T-50195 - T-65195, T-68/95 -T-71195, T-87195, T-88/95, T-103/95 og T-104/95, Sml.
Cembureau and its members concerning the exchange of information designed to facilitatethe implementation of the Cembureau agreement.
II, s. 491' Partemes navnefremgär af et skema i slutningen af nrervrerende indleg.
It also found that there were specificcross-border agreements, relating to Franco-Italian relations, Hispano-Portuguese relationsand Franco-Germanrelations.
Appelsagerne ved Domstolen til provelse af denne dom er blevetregistreret underrugrnu*.r c-204100 P, c-205/00P, c-211l00P, c-213100 P, c-217/00P og C-2r9t00 P.
Finally, italleged that a number of undertakings and associations of undertakings participated inconcerted practices contrary to Article 85(1) of the Treaty in the framework of twocommittees set up by the trade in order to discussexport problems: the European Cement Export Committee and the European Export Policy Committee.
a) Begrebet virksomhed og virksomhedssammenslutning
that it openly distanceditself from the unlawful concerted action or informed theother participants that it intended to take part in those meetings with different objects in mind, be considered to have participated in that agreement.
I henhold til den frellesskabsretligekonkurrenceret omfatter begrebetvirksomhed, som det er blevet defineret af Domstolen i dom af 23. april l99I (sagC- 41 l 90, Höfner og Elser, Sml.
The Court also held that there is no principle of Community law which precludesthe Commission from relying on a singlepiece of evidence in order to concludethat Article 85(1) of the Treaty has been infringed, provided that its evidentialvalue is undoubtedand that the evidence itself definitely atteststo the existenceof the infringement in question.
I,s. 1979), enhver enhed, som udsverskonomisk virksomhed, uanset denne enheds retlige status og densfinansieringsmäde.
In this connection, in order to assess theevidential value of a document, regard should be had first to the credibility of theaccount it contains.
Endvidere er det fastsläet, at enhver virksomhed, der bestäri at udbydevarer og tjenesteydelser pä markedet, er skonomisk virksomhed.
Regard should be had in particular to the person from whomthe document originates, the circumstances in which it came into being, theperson to whom it was addressed and whether, on its face, it appears sound andreliable.
Under henvisning til den faste retspraksis herom fastslog Retten i dom af 30.marts 2000 (sagT-5I3193, CNSD mod KommissionenS m , l. II,s. 1807),at at toldklarereres virksomhed er skonomisk virksomhed, og at toldklarerere derformä anses for virksomheder som omhandlet i traktatens artikel 85. Den udledteheraf, at erhvervssammenslutningen af representanterfor dette erhverv(CNSD) skulle anses for en sarnmenslutning af virksomheder i denne artikelsforstand, idet det er uden betydning for anvendeligheden af Frellesskabetskonkurrenceregler, at sammenslutningen er et offentligretligt organ.
In its consideration of whether the existence of the agreements and concertedpractices referred to in Article 4 of the contested decision was established,the Court stated that the mere fact that a producer from a Member Stateknew thatthe purchasesfrom it by other European producers had the object of halting, orat least reducing, its direct sales in the European markets does not allow theconclusion that it was party to an agreement or concerted practice contrary to Article 85(1) of the Treaty.
I den pägreldende sag fandt Retten ligeledes, at medlemmerneaf CNSD päbaggrundaf den nationale lovgivning ikke kunne betegnessom uaflrrengigesagkyndige, og at de ikke - ud over interesserne hos de virksomheder ellersarlmenslutninger af virksomheder, som havde udpeget dem forpligtettil at fastsette tarifferne under hensyntagen til ikke blot, men ogsä almenvelletog interesserne hos virksomheder i andre sektorer eller brugere af depägreldende tjenesteydelser.
Such knowledge can be deemedto reveal unlawfulconduct only if it is established that it was accompanied by the adherenceof thatproducer to the object pursued by the other European producers through thepurchases concerned.
Retten udledte heraf, at de beslutninger, hvorvedsalnmenslutningen fastsatte tarifferne for tjenesteydelser inden for erhvervet,ikke skulle anses for vrere statslige beslutninger, ved hjrelp af hvilke detteorgan udfsrte offentlige funktioner, men som afgorelser, der var truffet af ensalrlmenslutning af virksomheder, og som kunne v & re omfattet af anvendelsesomrädet for traktatens artikel 85. stk. ].
In so far as that object is against the interests of theproducer in question, only evidence of an undertaking by it that, in return for thepurchases, it would halt or reduce its direct sales on the European markets couldbe deemedto constitute adherence by it to that object.
Cement-sagen bekrreftede Kommissionens opfattelse i den anfregtedebeslutning af, at det ikke er en forudsretning,at branchesammenslutninger udsver en handels-eller produktionsmaessig virksomhed, for at traktatensartikel 85, stk. 1, finder anvendelse pä dem.
According to the contested decision, the Cembureau agreement was constitutedby "the whole of the arrangements adopted within the framework of Cembureauand the bilateral and/or multilateral meetings and contacts".
Traktatens artikel 85, stk. l,finder säledes anvendelse pä safilmenslutninger i det omfang, deres egenaktivitet eller den aktivitet, der udsves af de virksomheder, som er tilsluttetdem, tilsigter at fremkaldede virkninger, som bestemmelsen er rettet mod.
In ruling on theapplicants' claims, the Court considered whether the infringement found could becategorised as a single and continuous agreement.
Endelig bemrrkede Retten i dom af 12. december 2000 (sag T-I28198,Aöroports de Paris mod Kommissionen, endnu ikke trykt i Sarnling af
Before concluding that itcould, the Court stated that some of the conduct referred to in the operative partof the contested decision pursued the same anti-competitive objective as the Cembureau agreement and could therefore be regarded as elements of the rt2
Afgorelser), at konkurrencebestemmelserne i EF-traktaten fortsat finderanvendelse pä den del af sammenslutningens aktivitet, som kan udskilles fravirksomhed udovet som offentlig myndighed.
infringement referred to in Article 1 of the decision.
Den omstendighed, at Aöroportsde Paris var et offentligt selskab under ministeriet med ansvar for civil luftfart,og at det forestod forvaltningen af installationer under det offentligretligeomräde, var ikke i sig selv tilstraekkeligttil at udelukke, at det kunne anses foren virksomhed.
In that context, it stated thatbilateral or multilateral agreements or concerted practices can be regarded asconstituent elements of a single anti-competitive agreement only if it is establishedthat they form part of an overall plan pursuing a common objective.
Efter at have foretaget en sondring mellem den del afaktiviteten, der var rent forvaltningsmressig,og den, der bestod iadministration og drift af de parisiske lufthavne mod vederlag i form af afgifterbaseret pä omsretning,fandt Retten, at den sidstnrevnte del af aktiviteten var denesteydelser, der udgjorde erhvervsaktivitet.
Finding,however, that identity of object between such agreements or concerted practicesand such an anti-competitive agreement is not sufficient for an undertaking partyto the former to be held to be party to the latter, the Court then consideredwhether the applicants had been aware of the existence of the Cembureauagreement.
Virksomhed som administratoraf de parisiskelufthavne, som indebar, at A6roports de Paris kunne fastsrette de nrermere bestemmelser og vilkär for leverandsrer af visse former forground-handling-denester og som vederlag opkrreve omsretningsbaseredeafgifter, kunne ikke anses for at vere politivirksomhed, men skulle betragtessom erhvervsvirksomhed.
According to the Court, it is only if the undertakingknew, or oughtto have known, when it participated in those agreements or concerted practicesthat it was taking part in the single agreement that its participation in theagreements or concerted practices concerned may constitute the expressionof its accession to the single agreement.
Inden Retten havde truffet afgorelse, blev der anlagt en sagved Domstolen af Kommissionen i medfsr af EF-traktatens artikel 169 (nuartlkel 226 EF) med pästand om, at det blev fastsläet, at Den ItalienskeRepublik havde tilsidesat de forpligtelser, der pähvilede den i medfsr af EF-traktatens artikel 5 (nu artikel 10 EF) og traktatens artikel 85.
In this connection, it took due account of the system for establishing the infringement adopted in the contested decision underwhich, first, participation by an undertaking or association in a measure implementing the agreement constituted proof of its accession to that agreementand, second, the Commission had chosento rely solely on specific documentary evidence to establish the agreement and the measures implementing it and theparticipationof each party in them.
Retten udsatteden sag, der verseredefor den, indtil afsigelsenaf Domstolens dom, der fandtsted den 18. juni 1998. I sin dom i sagen Kommissionen mod ltalien (sag C-35196, Srnl.
The findings of the Court relating to the concept of a concerted practice are to benoted.
I, s. 3851) fastslog Domstolen, at Den Italienske Republik [havde] tilsidesat sine forpligtelser i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 5 og 85, idet Italien [havde] indfsrt og opretholdt en lov, der ved at tildele beslutningskompetence hertil [pälagdeCNSD] at bringe en vedtagelse inden foren sanlmenslutning af virksomheder i stand, som var i strid med EF-traktatens artikel 85, og som bestod i, at det fastsaetter en tarif, der er bindende for alletoldklarerere.
That condition of reciprocity is met where one competitor discloses itsintentions or future conduct on the market to another when the latter requests itor, at the very least, acceptsit. That is the case where the meeting at which aparty was informed by its competitor of the latter's intentionsor future conductwas held at the former's behest and it is apparentfrom the minutesof the meetingdrawn up by it that it expressedno reservationsor objections at all when itscompetitor informed it of its intentions.
Ved ovennrevnte dom af 30. marts 2000, CNSD modKommissionen, blev sagen for Rettenafsluttet. afsluttet.
The attitude of that party during themeeting cannot, in those circumstances, be reduced to the purely passiverole of
tarif ikke var en vedtagelse inden for en sarrmenslutning af virksomheder somomhandlet i denne artikel, da CNSD og dets medlemmer ikke havde handletselvstendigt.
a recipient of the information which its competitorunilaterally decided to pass onto it, without any request on its part.
c) Ordninger for enkelte sektorer
Other judgments
I ovennrevnte dom af L2. december 2000, Aöroports de Paris modKommissionen, tog Retten stilling til sporgsmälet, om Kommissionen med rettehavde anvendt forordning nr. 17 n pä Adroports de Paris' virksomhed.Sagsogeren gjorde greldende, at Kommissionen burde have anvendt forordning(EOF) nr.3975187 t0, som sammen med to andre forordningerträdte i stedetfor forordning nr. 141 11. Efter Rettens opfattelse gjorde den vilje, lovgiverenudtrykte i forordning nr. l4I, til at begraense undladelsenaf at anvendeforordning ff. 17 trl kun at gelde virksomhed, der direkte vedrsrte levering
The distinction between, on the one hand, genuinely unilateral conduct of amanufacturer in the context of the contractual relations maintainedby it with itsdealers and, on the other, conduct which is only ostensibly unilateral was clarifiedin the judgments of 6 July 2000 in Case T-62198 Volkswagen v Commission(under appeal, Case C-338/00 P) and of 26 October 2000 in Case T-41196 Bayerv Commission (under appeal, Cases C-210I P andC-3l01 P).
Rädets forordning nr. 17 af 6.2.1962: Fsrste forordning om anvendelse afbestemmelserne i traktatensartikler 85 og 86 (EFT I959-t962, s. 81).
In Volkswagen v Commission, the Court partly upheld an application forannulment of a Commission decision imposing a fine of EUR 102 000 000 on the Volkswagen group for infringement of Article 85(1) of the Treaty.
Rädets forordning (EgF) nr. 3975187 af 14.12.1987 om fastsrettelse af fremgangsmädenved anvendelse af konkurrencereglerne pä virksomheder i luftfartssektoren (EFT L374, s.1).
The Court, relying on existing case-law, held that a call by a motor vehiclemanufacturer to its authorised dealers is not a unilateral act which falls outside thescope of Article 85(1) of the Treaty but is an agreement within the meaning ofthat provision if, as in the case in point, it forms part of a set of continuousbusiness relations governed by a general agreement drawn up in advance.
af egentligetransportydelser, sig fortsat grldende i forordning nr. 3975187,säledes at denne forordning, der grelder specifikt, kun finder anvendelse pävirksomhed, der direkte vedrsrer lufttransportydelser.Da sagsogeren i denforeliggende sag ikke var et luftfartsselskab og ikke leveredetufttransportydelser, var det med rette at Kommissionen havde anvendtforordningm.17.
By contrast, in Bayer v Commission the Court annulled a Commission decisionof 10 January 1996 finding that there was an agreement between Bayer and its French and Spanish wholesalers intended to prevent the export of the medicinalproduct "Adalat" (or "Adalate") to the United Kingdom and imposing a fine of
Lftaler, der er ulovlige i medfsr af EF-traktatens artikel 85, stk. 1
The Commission, with which those wholesalers lodged a complaint, found that the Bayer group had infringed Article 85(1) of the Treaty and fined it on that basis.
Den 30. november 1994 vedtog Kommissionen en beslutning rettet t\l 42virksomheder og virksomhedssammenslutninger, hvori det blev fastsläet, at dervar indgäet en rrekke aftaler og anvendt forskellige former for praksis, derhavde til formäl at opdele markedet for grä cement og hvid cement i Europa.Efter Kommissionens opfattelse udgjorde disse aftaler en samlet overtrredelse,som diss e 42 adressater havde deltaget i, og hvis begyndelsestidspunkt blevfastsat til januar 1983.
By decision of 11 June 1998, the Commission found that A6roports de Paris hadinfringed Article 86 of the Treaty by using its dominant position to imposediscriminatory commercial fees at the Paris airports of Orly and Roissy-Charlesde Gaulle on suppliers of certain kinds of groundhandlingservices. In Aöroports
Cembureau-aftalen blev i den anfregtede beslutning anset for en samletog kontinuerlig overtrredelse, for sä vidt som den var blevet gennemfort indenfor rammerne af bilateraleog multilaterale aftaler.
Article 85(3) of the EEC Treaty to certain categoriesof motor vehicle distribution andservicing agreements (OJ 1985 L 15, p.
I den anfregtede beslutningsartikel 26 blev det fastsläet, at disse aftaler forelä, og at de forskellige
16), replaced, with effect from 1 October 1995,by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1475195 of 28 June 1995 (OJ 1995 L 145,p. 25).
virksomheder og sammenslutninger af virksomheder havde deltaget heri 12,Datoen for overtraedelsens ophor var derimoduvis. Beslutningens adressaterblev pälagt boder af et samlet belsb päca. 250 mio. EUR.
de Paris v Commission, cited above, the Court dismissed the application forannulment of that decision, after finding that the definition of the product marketand of the geographical market adopted by the Commission was correct, that A6roports de Paris did occupy a dominant position within the meaning of Article 86 and that that position had beenabused. abused.
Ved Retten benegtede samtlige sagssgere at have deltaget i den i beslutningensartikel 1 nrevnte aftale.
Access of undertakings under investigation to the Commission file
När der ikke er fsrt. bevis for, atvirksomheden tog afstand herfra, kan det forhold, at virksomheden ellersammenslutningen af virksomheder ikke retter sig efter resultaterne afmsderne, ikke fritage den for det fulde ansvar for dens deltagelse i kartellet.
Practically all the undertakings to whichthe decision was addressed complained that the Commission had allowed theminsufficient access to the file during the administrative procedure.
Cembureau-aftalen. Det anfsresogsä, at der var indgäet srerlige grirnseoverskridendeaftaler, henholdsvis vedrsrende det fransk-italienskeforhold, det spansk-portugisiskeforhold og det fransk+yskeforhold.
Court held that if the Commission takes the view that certain documents containbusiness secrets or other confidential information, it must prepare non-confidentialversionsof the documents in question or have them prepared by the parties fromwhich the documentscome.