swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Commercial - From: 1995 To: 1995
This page lists 16 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.
Telecom Corporation of New Zealand Ltd v Clear Communications Ltd [1995] 1 NZLR 385
1995
Commercial
(New Zealand) A trader is entitled, before he enters upon a line of conduct which is designed to affect his competitors, to know with some certainty whether or not what he proposes to do is lawful. The meaning and effect of section 36 of the 1986 Act is that use of a dominant position otherwise than for one of the proscribed purposes does not constitute a breach. Nor does the fact that a person has acted in order to achieve one of the proscribed purposes constitute a breach unless he has used his dominant position to achieve those purposes. The minority say that the purpose of section 36 is to prevent use of a dominant position for the purpose of stifling competition.
Commerce Act 1986 36(1)
1 Citers
MD Foods v Baines and others; ChD 1995 - [1995] ICR 296
Regina v Searle, Regina v K C S Products Ltd, Regina v Borjanovic, Regina v Bye Ltd Times, 27 February 1995
27 Feb 1995
CACD
Crime, Commercial
A restriction on trading with Serbia and Montenegro was valid and enforceable.
CCE Vittel and others v Commission [1995] EUECJ T-12/93
27 Apr 1995
ECFI
European, Commercial
ECJ Competition - Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 - Decision declaring a concentration compatible with the common market - Action for annulment - Admissibility - Trade unions and works councils - Act of direct and individual concern to them - Sufficient interest giving the recognized representatives of the employees the right to submit their observations, upon application, in the administrative procedure.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Langnese Iglo GmbH v Commission of the European Communities T-7/93; [1995] ECR II - 1533; [1995] EUECJ T-7/93
8 Jun 1995
ECFI
European, Commercial
ECJ Competition - Exclusive purchasing agreements for ice-cream - Relevant market - Possible barriers to entry to the market by third parties - Trade between Member States - Comfort letter - Block exemption - Lawfulness of withdrawal of the exemption - Prohibition of conclusion of exclusive agreements in the future.
The agreements providing for the exclusive purchase of ice cream could be terminated on 6 months' notice, the CFI held that, having regard to the economic and legal context and "the effective duration of the contractual agreements, which is around 2.5 years", the agreements fell within Art. 81(1).
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Alpine Investments Bv v Minister Van Financien; ECJ 16-Jun-1995 - Times, 16 June 1995; Gazette, 29 November 1995; [1995] 2 CLMR 209
Solvay SA v Commission T-32/91 [1995] EUECJ T-32/91
29 Jun 1995
ECFI
Commercial
ECJ Competition - Abuse of a dominant position - Commission's Rules of Procedure - Authentication of a decision adopted by the college of Commissioner
[ Bailii ]
Solvay v Commission T-31/91 T-31/91; [1995] EUECJ T-31/91
29 Jun 1995
ECFI
Commercial
Competition - Market-sharing agreement - Commission's Rules of Procedure - Authentication of a decision adopted by the college of Commissioners.
[ Bailii ]
Solvay v Commission T-30/91 [1995] EUECJ T-30/91
29 Jun 1995
ECFI
Commercial
ECJ Competition - Concerted practice - Presumption of innocence - Administrative procedure - Rights of the defence - Equality of arms - Access to the file.
[ Bailii ]
Associated Dairies Ltd v Baines and Others Gazette, 19 July 1995; Times, 06 July 1995
6 Jul 1995
CA
Contract, Commercial
A milkman's round agreement with the dairy supplying him with milk for sale, was registerable as a restrictive agreement if the words so require despite alternative remedies, and even though in this instance it might be borderline.
Restrictive Trade Practices Act 1976 9(3)
1 Cites
1 Citers
Groupement National des Negociants en Pommes de Terre de Belgique Belgapom) v ITM Belgium SA and Vocarex SA C-63/94; [1995] ECR I-0000; [1995] EUECJ C-63/94
11 Aug 1995
ECJ
European, Commercial
Europa Trade between Member States is not likely to be impeded, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, by the application to products from other Member States of national provisions restricting or prohibiting certain selling arrangements so long as those provisions apply to all relevant traders operating within the national territory and so long as they affect in the same manner, in law and in fact, the marketing of domestic products and of those from other Member States. Where those conditions are satisfied, the application of such rules to the sale of products from another Member State meeting the rules laid down by that State is not by nature such as to prevent their access to the market or to impede access any more than it impedes the access of domestic products. Such rules therefore fall outside the scope of Article 30 of the Treaty. It follows that Article 30 of the Treaty is to be interpreted as not applying where a Member State prohibits by legislation any sale which yields only a very low profit margin.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Groupement National Des Negociants En Pommes De Terre De Belgium v Itm Belgium S Times, 25 September 1995; Ind Summary, 09 October 1995
25 Sep 1995
ECJ
European, Commercial
European Community quantitative restrictions on import not relevant to every states legislation. Measures applying equally to all traders within a member state were not discriminatory.
EC Treaty Article 30
Bundeskartellamt v Volkswagen and VAG Leasing (Rec 1995,p I-3477) (Judgment) C-266/93; [1995] EUECJ C-266/93
24 Oct 1995
ECJ
Commercial
ECJ 1. Article 85(1) of the Treaty must be interpreted as meaning that it prohibits an obligation imposed by the leading manufacturer of motor vehicles in a Member State on all its dealers established in that State to develop activities as agents for leasing transactions exclusively for the account of its own leasing company. By restricting the access of leasing companies competing with the company owned by the manufacturer to leasing transactions concerning the manufacturer' s vehicles and by preventing the manufacturer' s dealers from developing a leasing business in their own name and for their own account, such exclusive agency agreements have the object, or at least effect, of restricting competition to an appreciable extent. Secondly, such contracts affect trade between Member States, since those dealers are unable to act either as intermediaries for leasing companies established in other Member States or to conclude leasing contracts for their own account with consumers established in other Member States.
2. Regulation No 123/85 on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements must be interpreted as meaning that it does not exempt an obligation imposed by the leading motor vehicle manufacturer in a Member State on all its dealers established in that State to develop activities as agents for leasing transactions exclusively for the account of its own leasing company.
[ Bailii ]
Bayerische Motorenwerke v ALD C-70/93; [1995] EUECJ C-70/93
24 Oct 1995
ECJ
Commercial
ECJ (Judgment) 1. Article 85(1) of the Treaty must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes a motor vehicle manufacturer which sells its vehicles through a selective distribution system from agreeing with its authorized dealers that they are not to deliver vehicles to independent leasing companies where, without granting an option to purchase, those companies make them available to lessees whose residence or seat is outside the contract territory of the dealer in question, or from calling on such dealers to act in that manner.
By establishing absolute territorial protection for the various dealers and reducing each dealer' s freedom of commercial action, in so far as each individual dealer' s choice of customer is confined exclusively to those leasing companies which have concluded contracts with lessees established within its contract territory, such an agreement has as its object and effect the restriction to an appreciable extent of trade within the common market. Secondly, since such an agreement relates to products which are the subject of significant international trade, it may affect trade between Member States.
2. Regulation No 123/85 on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements must be interpreted as meaning that it does not exempt an agreement whereby a motor vehicle manufacturer which sells its vehicles through a selective distribution system agrees with its dealers that they are not to deliver vehicles to independent leasing companies where, without granting an option to purchase, those companies make them available to lessees whose residence or seat is outside the contract territory of the dealer in question, or calls on such dealers to act in that manner.
[ Bailii ]
Marchant and Eliot Underwriting Ltd v Dr Higgins [1996] 1 Lloyd's Rep 313; [1996] CLC 301; [1996] 3 C M L R 313; [1997] E C C 11; Lloyd's List January 10 1996 (I D )
24 Oct 1995
ComC
Rix J
European, Commercial
cw European Union - competition - Lloyd's - article 85(1) - RSC Order 14 - cash call on underwriters - unlawful attempt to enforce anti-competitive object of Central Fund - Agency Agreement Bye-law - standard terms - per se illegality - complex agreement - anti-competitive object - incidental restrictions on competition -effect on inter-Member State trade
1 Cites
1 Citers
Union Royale Belge des societes de Football Association and others v Bosman and others; ECJ 15-Dec-1995 - C-415/93; [1995] EUECJ C-415/93; [1995] ECR I-4921
