Odbor kompatibility s právem ES
Úřad vlády ČR
I S A P
Informační Systém pro Aproximaci Práva
Databáze č. 17 : Databáze judikatury
ă Odbor kompatibility s právem ES, Úřad vlády ČR - určeno pouze pro potřebu ministerstev a ostatních ústředních orgánů

Číslo (Kód CELEX):
Number (CELEX Code):		61972J0048
Název:
Title: 		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 6 FEBRUARY 1973. S.A. BRASSERIE DE HAECHT V THE SPOUSES WILKIN-JANSSEN. PRELIMINARY RULING REQUESTED BY THE TRIBUNAL DE COMMERCE DE LIEGE. HAECHT II. CASE 48-72.
Publikace:
Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1973 PAGES 0077 - 0090
Předmět (klíčová slova):
Keywords		COMPETITION;RULES APPLYING TO UNDERTAKINGS;EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENTS;
Související předpisy:
Corresponding acts:		157E085;157E085;362R0017;362R0017;362R0017
Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty:
Corresponding Judgements:
Plný text:
Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:


Názor soudu a komentář:


Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
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, THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF CONTRACTUAL CERTAINTY REQUIRES THAT A COURT CAN ONLY DECLARE THE AGREEMENT TO BE VOID AFTER THE COMMISSION HAS GIVEN ITS DECISION UNDER THAT REGULATION. NOTIFICATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 4 OF REGULATION NO 17 IN RESPECT OF AGREEMENTS ENTERED INTO AFTER THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 85 BY THIS REGULATION DO NOT HAVE SUSPENSIVE EFFECT. THE COURT, WHICH, BY VIRTUE OF THE PRINCIPLE OF LEGAL CERTAINTY, MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, IN APPLYING THE PROHIBITIONS OF ARTICLE 85, ANY DELAY BY THE COMMISSION IN EXERCISING ITS POWERS, HAS HOWEVER AN OBLIGATION TO DECIDE ON THE CLAIMS OF INTERESTED PARTIES WHO INVOKE THE AUTOMATIC NULLITY. THESE CONSIDERATIONS APPLY EQUALLY TO AGREEMENTS EXEMPTED FROM NOTIFICATION, SUCH EXEMPTION BEING MERELY AN INCONCLUSIVE INDICATION THAT THE AGREEMENTS CONCERNED ARE GENERALLY LESS HARMFUL TO T
HE SMOOTH FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMON MARKET.

2. THE INITIATION OF A PROCEDURE WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 9 OF REGULATION NO 17 IMPLIES AN AUTHORITATIVE ACT OF THE COMMISSION, EVIDENCING ITS INTENTION OF TAKING A DECISION UNDER ARTICLES 2, 3 OR 6. IT FOLLOWS THEREFORE THAT THE SIMPLE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF A REQUEST FOR A NEGATIVE CLEARANCE OR OF NOTIFICATION FOR THE PURPOSES OF OBTAINING EXEMPTION UNDER ARTICLE 85 (3) OF THE TREATY CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS INITIATING A PROCEDURE UNDER ARTICLES 2, 3 OR 6 OF REGULATION NO 17.

3. DUE NOTIFICATION OF A STANDARD CONTRACT IS TO BE CONSIDERED AS DUE NOTIFICATION OF ALL CONTRACTS IN THE SAME TERMS, EVEN PRIOR ONES, ENTERED INTO BY THE SAME UNDERTAKING.

4. A DECLARATION OF NULLITY UNDER ARTICLE 85 (2) IS OF RETROACTIVE EFFECT.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):