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: 1996 To: 1996
This page lists 9 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.
Iberian UK Ltd v BPB Industries plc; ChD 1996 - [1997] ICR 164; [1996] 2 CMLR 601; [1997] EuLR 1
MD Foods v Baines and others [1996] ICR 183
1996
CA
Stuart-Smith, Hirst and Schiemann L.JJ
Commercial
The parties agreed to buy and sell milk but not to each others customers. The agreement was a restricve trade parctice and was void for not having been registered.
1 Cites
1 Citers
Aberdeen Solicitor's Property Centre Ltd and Another v Director General of Fair Trading; RPC 20-Feb-1996 - Times, 20 February 1996
Commission v Belgium C-87/94 [1996] ECR I-2043; [1996] EUECJ C-87/94
25 Apr 1996
ECJ
Commercial
ECJ (Judgment) 1. The procedure laid down by Directive 90/531 on the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors must be observed irrespective of the nationality or seat of the tenderers. The obligation, imposed on contracting entities by Article 4(1) of the directive, to apply procedures which are adapted to the provisions of the directive is not subject to any such condition and it is always possible that undertakings established in other Member States may be concerned directly or indirectly by the award of a contract.
Although under Article 15(1) of the directive contracting entities obliged to apply the procedures in the directive do indeed have a degree of choice regarding the procedure to be applied to a contract, once they have issued an invitation to tender under one particular procedure they are required to observe the rules applicable to it, until the contract has been finally awarded.
2. It follows from the terms of Directive 90/531 on the procurement procedures of entitites operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors that the contracting entity' s procedure for comparing tenders has to comply at every stage with both the principle of the equal treatment of tenderers and the principle of transparency.
A Member State which, in the procedure for the award of a public contract by a public undertaking operating a bus service:-
takes into account fuel consumption figures submitted by a tenderer after the opening of tenders, where those figures exceed a limit which the tenderer himself stipulated in his initial tender in regard to any change in fuel consumption figures,
awards the contract to the same tenderer on the basis of figures which do not correspond to the prescriptive requirements of the contract documents for calculating the notional penalty of the tenderer in question for maintenance costs in respect of engine and gear box replacement,
takes into account, when comparing tenders for certain lots, the cost-saving features suggested by the same tenderer, without having referred to them in the contract documents or in the tender notice, uses them to offset the financial differences between the tenders in first place and those of the tenderer in question and accepts some of the same tenderer' s tenders as a result of taking those features into account, fails to fulfil that obligation.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Stagecoach Holdings Plc v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Times, 29 October 1996
29 Oct 1996
OHCS
Commercial
No presumption as to size of area for investigation by Monopolies Commission.
Fair Trading Act 1973 64
Tetra Pak v Commission C-333/94; [1997] 4 CMLR 662; [1996] EUECJ C-333/94P
14 Nov 1996
ECJ
Commercial
When defining the relevant market for the purpose of applying Article 86 of the Treaty, the competitive conditions and the structure of supply and demand on the market are relevant criteria for determining whether certain products are interchangeable with others. Application of Article 86 presupposes a link between the dominant position and the alleged abusive conduct, which is normally not present where conduct on a market distinct from the dominated market produces effects on that distinct market. In the case of distinct, but associated, markets, application of Article 86 to conduct found on the associated, non-dominated, market and having effects on that associated market can only be justified by special circumstances. An undertaking which enjoys a quasi-monopoly on certain markets and a leading position on distinct, though closely associated, markets is placed in a situation comparable to that of holding a dominant position on those markets as a whole. Conduct by such an undertaking on those distinct markets which is alleged to be abusive may therefore be covered by Article 86 of the Treaty without any need to show that it is dominant on them. The list of abusive practices set out in the second paragraph of Article 86 of the Treaty is not exhaustive. Consequently, even where tied sales of two products are in accordance with commercial usage or there is a natural link between the two products in question, such sales may still constitute abuse within the meaning of Article 86 unless they are objectively justified. When determining whether an undertaking has practised predatory pricing for the purposes of applying Article 86 of the Treaty, a distinction must be drawn between prices below average variable costs, which must always be considered abusive, and prices below average total costs but above average variable costs, which are only to be considered abusive if an intention to eliminate can be shown. It would not be appropriate to require in addition, in order to categorize its pricing as predatory, proof that the undertaking concerned had a realistic chance of recouping its losses. It must be possible to penalize predatory pricing whenever there is a risk that competitors will be eliminated.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Ex Parte Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council Times, 16 December 1996
16 Dec 1996
QBD
Local Government, Commercial
A term in a tender requiring an undertaking to incorporate certain terms was anti-competitive.
Local Government Act 1988 32
Moccia Irme SpA v Commission of the European Communities; ECFI 17-Dec-1996 - T-164/96
Mats Arne Olof Wilander; Karel Novacek v; Brian Tobin and David Jude (the President and Honorary Treasurer Respectively of the International Tennis Federation) [1996] EWCA Civ 1280
20 Dec 1996
CA
Commercial
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
