55
Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Paul Hughes

Brussels

30th March 2005

Article 81

Page 2: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Presentation Overview

• Article 81(1) - its width

• Horizontal agreements

• Vertical agreements

• Article 81(2) – nullity sanction

• Article 81(3)- capable of exemption?

Page 3: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Article 81(1) - structure

• Agreements between, concerted practices and

decisions by associations of

• Undertakings

• Which may affect trade between member states

• Having as their object or effect

• Prevention restriction or distortion of competition in EU

Page 4: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Article 81(1)

• Agreements: ACF Chemiefarma NV; BP Kemi; Sandoz;

Ford Europe; Adalat

• Concerted practice: Dyestuffs; Suiker Unie;

Polypropylene; Wood Pulp

• Decisions of associations: Vereeniging van

Cementhandelaren; EPI Code of Conduct

Page 5: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Article 81(1) - Undertakings

• Public sector: Aeroports de Paris; Bodson; Hofner &

Elser; Fenin

• Employees/self employed: Becu; Reuter/BASF; Albany;

• Share ownership: Viho; Hydrotherm/Andreoli

• Professions: Wouters; EPI Code of Conduct

Page 6: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Article 81(1) – Effect on Trade

• Consten & Grundig – concept defines boundary

between national and EU law;

• Key issue is capacity to affect imports/exports;

Dutch Electro-technical Fittings Equipment; BNIC

v Clair; Fire Insurance

Bagnasco; Dutch Banks

Javico v Yves St Laurent

• Commission Guidelines 2004/C 101/07

Page 7: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Article 81(1) – Object or Effect

• Object: price fixing, allocation of markets or customers,

output or sales limitations

• Effect: requires economic analysis

Delimitis v Henninger Brau

European Night Services

Van den Bergh

Page 8: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Article 81(1) – Restriction of Competition

• Commission Notice on Agreements of Minor Importance

- where parties are:

– Competitors – aggregate market share cap of 10%

– Not actual/potential competitors - individual market share cap 15%

– Classification difficult – 10% cap applicable

• Parallel networks of restrictive agreements cumulatively

affecting competition in relevant market – caps reduced

to 5%

Page 9: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Article 81(2) - Nullity

• English blue pencil test – agreement may be invalid

• Passmore v Morland plc: market shares may rise

• Right of damages: Courage Limited v Crehan

Page 10: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• Article 81(1) infringed? SLT v Maschinenbau Ulm; Metro; Pronuptia; Nungesser; Remia & Nutricia; Gottrup Klim

• “Rule of Reason”: Metropole v Commission

• Commission Guidelines on application of Article 81(3) 2004/C 101/08

• Article 81(3) requirements:

– Improve production/distribution or promote technical/economic progress

– Confer fair share of benefits on consumers

– Restrictions imposed indispensable to these objectives

– Do not substantially eliminate competition

• Block exemptions: legal certainty

Relationship of Articles 81(1) and 81(3)

Page 11: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Concerted Practice/Information Exchanges

CorporateJV

MergerCollaborative

Agreement

Behavioural arrangements

Structural arrangements

ECMRArt 81(3)

Horizontal Arrangements

Page 12: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Concerted Practice/Information Exchanges

CorporateJV

MergerCollaborative

Agreement

NB: Between CompetitorsHard core cartel

criminal offence UK

Behavioural arrangements

Structural arrangements

Art 81(3) ECMR

Horizontal Arrangements

Page 13: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Horizontal Arrangements

• R & D Block Exemption Regulation (Reg 2659/00) NB:

– Competing undertakings - 25% market share cap

– Parties must have access to results for research/exploitation (research bodies/universities can be confined to research)

– Parties must be free to conduct R&D in unconnected fields and to challenge other party’s IP (however right to terminate R&D agreement)

• Specialisation Block Exemption Regulation (Reg. 2658/00) NB:

– Competing undertakings

– 20% market share cap

• Article 81(3) and Commission Guidelines(2001/C 3/02): UEFA; Premier League; Veronica/Endemol; Television par Satellite; Ford/VW

Page 14: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Vertical Agreements

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

Supply Agreement

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER <30% Share

Licence

RESELLER

Page 15: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• RPM• Export bans• NB Agency

Price/Geog

Supply Agreement

EFFECT

Licence

RESELLEROBJECT

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER <30% Share

Vertical Agreements

Page 16: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• RPM• Export bans• NB Agency

Price/Geog

Supply Agreement

EFFECT

Licence

RESELLEROBJECT

Price/Geog

• RRP• Exclusive territory

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER <30% Share

Vertical Agreements

Page 17: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• RPM• Export bans• NB Agency

Price/Geog

Supply Agreement

EFFECT

Licence

RESELLEROBJECT

• Selective• Franchising

QualityPrice/Geog

• RRP• Exclusive territory

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER <30% Share

Vertical Agreements

Page 18: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• RPM• Export bans• NB Agency

Price/Geog

Supply Agreement

EFFECT

Licence

RESELLEROBJECT

• Selective• Franchising

Quality Segmentation

• Customers• Product categories

Price/Geog

• RRP• Exclusive territory

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER <30% Share

Vertical Agreements

Page 19: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• RPM• Export bans• NB Agency

Price/Geog

Supply Agreement

EFFECT

Licence

RESELLEROBJECT

• Selective• Franchising

Quality Segmentation

Volumes/foreclosure

• Purchase obligations• Non-compete

Price/Geog

• RRP• Exclusive territory

• Customers• Product categories

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER <30% Share

Vertical Agreements

Page 20: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER< 30%Share

Licence

RESELLER

Supply Agreement

Vertical Agreements

Page 21: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• Export Bans• RPM

OBJECT

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER< 30%Share

Licence

RESELLER

Supply Agreement

Vertical Agreements

Page 22: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• Export Bans• RPM

30% 40%

Market Share

EFFECTOBJECT

20%

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER< 30%Share

Licence

RESELLER

Supply Agreement

Vertical Agreements

Page 23: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• Export Bans• RPM

30% 40%

Market Share

• Territorial exclusivity• Selective Networks• Franchising

EFFECTOBJECT

20%

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER< 30%Share

Licence

RESELLER

Supply Agreement

Vertical Agreements

Page 24: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• Export Bans• RPM

30% 40% 50% 70%XX

• Loyalty rebates • Exclusive purchase (80%+)• Bundling/Tying• Pricing Discrimination• Refusal to deal

Market Share

• Territorial exclusivity• Selective Networks• Franchising

EFFECTOBJECT

20%

IP Owner(s)(R&D <25% Share)

MANUFACTURER/SUPPLIER< 30%Share

Licence

RESELLER

Supply Agreement

Vertical Agreements

Page 25: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Vertical Agreement Block Exemption Regulation 279/99 (“VABER”)

Covers agreements between 2 or more undertakings at different levels in distribution chain

Supplier

Retailer

Wholesaler

Page 26: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Non-Competitors

Parties must not be actual or potential competitors unless reseller’s total annual turnover < €100 million

ORSupplier of Services

Service Provider (not competing upstream with

supplier)

Direct Supply

Supplier of Goods

Direct Sales

Distributor (where not a competing –

manufacturer)

Where agreement is non-reciprocal

Page 27: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Market Share Cap

Supplier

Reseller

Non-exclusive

Supplier

Reseller

Exclusive

< 30%

< 30%

Page 28: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Hardcore Restrictions – Price

Supplier

Reseller

NB. Indirect RPM/fixed prices: price monitoring, discount fixing, margin fixing, delivery and suspensions, pre-printed prices.

Maximum or recommended prices permissible

Minimum/fixed prices impermissible

Page 29: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Hardcore Restrictions – Customers and Territory (1)

Can allocate

• Exclusive territory

• Exclusive customer segment

Reseller

Supplier

Reseller(s)

Where exclusive territories are reserved to supplier or conferred on other resellers

Page 30: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Hardcore Restrictions – Customers and Territory (2)

Supplier

Reseller 1 Reseller 2

Exclusive Territory A

Exclusive Territory B

Can prevent active but not passive sales (NB. Internet)

Page 31: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Hardcore Restrictions – Selective Networks

Supplier

Selective Wholesaler I

Selective Wholesaler 2

Selective Wholesaler 3

Selective Retailer 1

Selective Retailer 2

Selective Retailer 3

End Users

Cannot ban end user sales; can require to operate from authorised premises

Must allow cross sales within the selective network

Can ban

sales

Page 32: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Vulnerable Restrictions (1) – Spare Parts

Supplier

Reseller

Competitors of supplier for incorporation

Can Restrict

Spare Parts

End User/Repairer

Cannot restrict

Components

Page 33: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Vulnerable Restrictions (2) – Non Compete Obligations

Supplier

Reseller

5 years only 80%+ exclusive

purchase obligationExcept where lease conferred when duration = period of lease

NB. Cannot prohibit selective dealers from selling specified competitive brands

Page 34: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Vulnerable Restrictions (3) Post Termination Restrictions

• Limited to:-

Competing goods/services

Premises from which reseller operated

One year (know how unlimited whilst remains

secret)

and must be indispensable to protect know how

Page 35: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Motor Vehicle Block Exemption Regulation 1400/2002 (“MVBER”)

• Previous BERs conferred high degree of intra-brand protection to safeguard dealer investments in sales/servicing

• However price differentials between Member States have persisted

• Frequent violations of Article 81 by manufacturers, e.g. BMW, Ford, Peugeot, Citroen, VW, Opel and DaimlerChrysler

Page 36: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

MVBER - Outline

• Follows a similar pattern to VABER

• Applies to agreements at all levels of vehicle distribution in respect of:

– Sale of new motor cars and commercial vehicles

– After-sale servicing

– Spare part supply

• Parties must be non-competitors save for non-reciprocal vertical agreements:

– between reseller with annual sales <€100m; or

– where manufacturer competes in direct sales and reseller not a manufacturer

Page 37: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

MVBER – Market Shares

• As with VABER a 30% cap (measured by reference to reseller for exclusive distribution)

• Selective distribution:

– Qualitative selective distribution – no limit on market share (case law reliant)

– Quantitative selective distribution 40% cap

• Different markets for (and consequent shares of):

– new vehicles

– new parts

– service/repair

Page 38: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

MVBER – Conditions (1)

• Agreement must: – be for a minimum of 5 years; or

– if indefinite be terminable on 2 years notice or one year if supplier pays compensation (mandated by law or special agreement) or whole/substantial part of network being reorganised

• Disputes to be remitted to arbitration

• Termination notices must be in writing giving detailed objective and transparent reasons

• Reseller must have right to assign to another approved dealer

Page 39: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

MVBER – Conditions (2)

• Cannot require reseller to purchase 30%+ of requirements for goods/services from supplier

• Prohibition of sales of competing brands goods/services impermissible

• Post-termination restrictions on provision of goods/services impermissible

Page 40: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

MVBER – Hardcore Restrictions (1)

• Follows a similar pattern to VABER

• Setting fixed/minimum prices

• Territory/customer restrictions save for prohibition of:– Active sales to reserved customers/territories

– Wholesale sales to end users

– Sales to dealers outside selective network

– Sales of components for incorporation by competitor

• Prohibition on cross supplies within selective network

• Prohibition on retail sales by selective dealers (subject to authorised establishment requirement)

Page 41: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

MVBER – Hardcore Restrictions (2)

• Prohibition on selling new model within contract range

• Restricting reseller’s ability to subcontract repair/services to authorised repairers

• Linking vehicle sales and servicing/sale of spare parts

• Limits on sales of OEM products

• Refusing access by independent operators to manufacturer’s technical information, diagnostic tools and software needed for repair/maintenance

Page 42: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Licensor

Licensee

Not multiparty, although guidelinesindicate that multiparty licenceswill be judged accordingto their effects underArt.s 81(1) and 81(3)

Technology Transfer Block Exemption Regulation

Page 43: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Licensor

Licensee

Patents, includes:• utility models• design rights (registered and unregistered)• topographies of semiconductor products• supplementary certificates for medicinal products• plant breeder’s rights

The IP rights

Page 44: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

The IP rights

Licensor

Licensee

Know-how: package of non patentedpractical information

• secret (not generally known)• substantial: information indispensable for the manufacture or provision of the contract products• identifiable in a manner which enables verification of criteria of secrecy and substantiality

Page 45: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

The IP rights

Licensor

Licensee

Software copyright

Page 46: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Licensor

Licensee

Licence of each or a mixture of:

1) patents2) know-how3) software copyrightand other ancillary IP rights necessary for the manufacture orprovision of the contract products/services

The IP rights

Page 47: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• The technology market - actual competitors

• The product market – actual OR potential competitors

• Difficult to ascertain markets

• Technology markets based on downstream sales of product

• NB: Market share volatility

The Concept of Competitors

Page 48: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

The Market Share Caps

Licensor

Licensee

Non-Competitorseach party’s share < 30%

Competitors -parties’ shares in aggregate < 20%

NB. Para 131 Guidelines – 4 competing technologies

Page 49: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

The technology

market

Licensor A(has separate market sharesof 100%+15%)

Licensor B(45%)

Licensor D(20%)

Licensor C(30%)

The product market

Licensee A (100%)market share in specialist

safety gloves

Licensee A (15%), Licensee B (45%),Licensee C (30%), Licensee D (20%) in general non-specialist market forsafety apparel

End Users

Market Shares

Page 50: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• Restriction on either licensor or licensee prices

• Output/sales limitations (save for limitations on a licensee in a non-reciprocal agreement or on only one licensee in a

reciprocal agreement)

• Restriction on licensee’s exploitation of own technology or on parties R&D unless indispensable to protect know-how

The “Hardcore” Restrictions where licensor and licensee are competitors

Page 51: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• Market/customer restrictions save for:

Field of use restriction on licensee

In a non-reciprocal agreement restriction on either/both parties relating to reserved field of use or exclusive territory

Licensor obligation not to license another licensee in a particular territory

Restriction in a non-reciprocal agreement of active and/or passive sales to territory/customer group of other party

Restriction in a non-reciprocal agreement of active sales by licensee to exclusive territory/customer group of a licensee (which was non-competing on grant of licence)

Restriction on licensee to produce for own use (no active/passive restrictions on sale of spare parts for own products)

Restriction in a non-reciprocal agreement to produce as alternative source of supply for designated customer

The “Hardcore” Restrictions where licensor and licensee are competitors

Page 52: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

• Minimum/fixed resale prices

• Restrictions on parties’ R&D unless indispensable to protect know- how

• Restriction on territories/customers (save for certain permissible restrictions - see next slide)

The “Hardcore” Restrictions where licensor and licensee are not competitors

And save for:-

Own use (and spare parts sale rights)

Alternative source of customer supply

Restrictions on wholesales to end users

Prohibition of sales to unauthorised distributors by members of a selective network

Page 53: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Licensor

Licensee 1

Non-competitors

Can allocate:• Exclusive territories• Customer segments and restrict passive sales into licensor territories/customers and passive sales into other licensee territory/customers for initial 2 years

Licensee 2

Non-competitors

Territory 1Sub-distributor 1

Territory 2Sub-distributor 2

Territory 3Sub-distributor 3

Cannot ban sales

The Permissible Territorial and Customer Restrictions (1)

Page 54: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Licensor

Licensee 1

Non-competitors

Licensee 2

Non-competitors

Selective Wholesaler 1

Selective Wholesaler 2

Selective Wholesaler 3

Selective Retailer 1

Selective Retailer 2

Selective Retailer 3

Must allow crosssales in network

End Users

Cannot bansales

The Permissible Territorial andCustomer Restrictions (2)

Page 55: Paul Hughes Brussels 30 th March 2005 Article 81

Excluded Restrictions

• Grant back of exclusive licence or assignment by licensee of severable improvements

• Prohibition on challenging licensor’s intellectual property

(NB licensor right of termination)

• Where licensor and licensee are not competitors, limitation on licensee’s ability to exploit own technology or engage in independent R&D (unless indispensible to protect licensor known how)