ECJ 1. Policy of the EEC- competition – agreements between undertakings – prohibition in article 85(1) – consideration of the economic and legal context 2. Policy of the EEC – competition – agreements which may effect trade between member states – concept (EEC treaty, article 85) 3. Policy of the EEC – competition – brewery contracts – prohibition in article 85(1) – conditions of application 1. For the purpose of examining whether a contract is caught by article 85(1) it cannot be examined in isolation from its economic and legal context, that is, from the factual or legal circumstances causing it to prevent, restrict or distort competition. 2. To be capable of affecting trade between member states, it must be possible for an agreement, decision or practice, when viewed in the light of all the objective factual or legal circumstances, to appear to be capable of having some influence, direct or indirect, on trade between member states, of being conducive to a partitioning of the market or of hampering the economic interpenetration sought by the treaty. Cf. Paragraph 7, summary, case 56/65 (1967) ECR 3. Agreements whereby an undertaking agrees to obtain its supplies from one undertaking to the exclusion of all others do not by their very nature necessarily include all the elements constituting incompatibility with the common market referred to in article 85(1) of the treaty. Such agreements may, however, exhibit such elements where, taken either in isolation or together with others, and in the economic and legal context in which they are made, on the basis of a set of objective factors of law or of fact, they may affect trade between member states and where they have either as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition.
Citations:
C-23/67, [1967] ECR 407, R-23/67, [1967] EUECJ R-23/67
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – Courage Ltd and Crehan v Crehan and Courage Ltd and Others ECJ 20-Sep-2001
The company had leased a public house to the respondent. The lease was subject to a tie, under which the respondent had to purchase supplies from the company. The company came to sue for the price of beer supplied. The respondent asserted that the . .
See Also – Sa Brasserie De Haecht v Wilkin-Janssen ECJ 6-Feb-1973
ECJ Agreements Prior And Subsequent To Regulation No 17 – 1. When an agreement prior to the implementation of article 85 by regulation no 17 has been notified in accordance with the provisions of that regulation, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European
Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.131852