JUDGMENT OF 31. 5. 1979 — CASE 22/78 HUGIN v COMMISSION

In Case 22/78

THE COURT composed of: J. Mertens de Wilmars, President of Chamber Acting President, and Lord Mackenzie Stuart, President of Chamber, P. Pescatore, M. Sørensen, A. O'Keeffe, G. Bosco and A. Touffait, Judges, Advocate General: G. Reischl Registrar: J. A. Pompe, Assistant Registrar

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Facts and Issues

I — Facts and Procedure

B — Factual and legal considerations in the decision

1. Facts

(a) The undertakings

(1) The Hugin group

(2) Liptons

(3) Other producers

(b) The product

(c) After-sales service and repair

(d) The collaboration between Liptons and Hugin

(e) The effect of the refusal to supply spare parts

2. Legal assessment

(a) The alleged dominant position

(b) The alleged abuse

(c) The alleged effects on trade between Member States

(d) The order to supply spare parts

(e) The fine

C — Written procedure

II — Conclusions of the parties

III — Submissions and arguments of the parties

A — The alleged dominant position

1. Hugin's application

2. The Commission's defence

(a) General comments

(b) Observations onHugin's legal argument

3. Hugin's reply

4. The Commission's rejoinder

B — The alleged abuse

1. The refusal to supply spare parts to Liptons did not cause competition to be substantially restricted

2. The refusal to supply was objectively justified

3. The refusal to supply could not affect trade between Member States

4. Article 86 has been misused by the Commission to attack selective distribution and maintenance permitted under Article 85

C — The order to supply spare parts

D — The fine

IV — Oral procedure

Decision

Hugin's position on the market

Hugin's conduct on the market

The effects on trade between the Member States

Costs