Opinion of Judge Vesterdorf acting as Advocate General delivered on 10 July 1991

1 Original language: Danish.

2 See Baden Fuller in European Law Review 1979, p. 439.

3 SA Musique Diffusion Française and Others v Commission [1983] ECR 1825, at 1930.

4 Judgment of 14 July 1981 in Case 172/80 Gerhard Zūchner v Bayerische Vereimhank AG [1981] ECR 2021 (paragraph 14, at p. 2031).

5 Council Regulation No 17/62/EEC of 6 February 1962: First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (OJ, English Special Edition 1959-1962, p. 87). * In this caie the names Montedison, Montepolimeri and Montedipe, as well as the abbreviation Monte, appear inter alia. According to the documents in the case, until the end of 1980 the parent company of the Montedison Group, Montedison S. p. A., itself undertook polypropylene production but from 1 January 1981 production was transferred to the wholly-owned subsidiary Montepolimeri S. p. A. to which the Statement of Objections was addressed. As is apparent from the fourth paragraph of point 8 of the decision, in conjunction with Articles 3 and 5 thereof, an internal reorganization of the Montedison Group took place, which resulted in the decision being addressed to Montedipe S. p. A., which is the applicant in Case T-14/89. In this Opinion the undertaking will be referred to as Montedipe or Monte.

6 According to the note drawn up by Shell's representatives after the meeting, Annex 16 to Shell's application (Case T-11/89).

7 Judgment of 25 October 1983 in Case 107/82 AEG v Commiision [1983] ECR 3151.

8 Judgment of 29 October 1980 in Joined Cases 209 to 215/78 van Landewyck and Others v Commission (Fedelalf) [1980] ECR 3125 (paragraphs 79-81, p. 3248), and judgment of 7 June 1983 in Joined Cases 100-103/80 SA Musique Diffusion Française and Others v Commission (the Pioneer cases) [1983] ECR 1825 (paragraphs 6 to 8, p. 1880).

9 Case No 13258/87, M & Co. v Federal Republic of Germany.

10 See footnote 7.

11 Judgment of 21 February 1984.

12 See also Piiakos, Les Droits de la Défense et le Droit Communautaire de la Concurrence, Bruylant, Brussels 1987, p. 145 et seq.

13 On this point, see the judgment of the Court of 9 November 1983 in Case 322/81 NV Nederlandsche Banden-Industrie Michelin v Commission [1983] ECR 3461, at paragraphs 5 to 10, pp. 3498, 3499.

14 See footnote 7.

15 [1986] ECR 1899.

16 Judgment of 17 January 1984 in Joined Cases 43 and 63/82 VBVB and VBBB v Commission [(1984] ECR 19 (paragraphs 23 to 25, at p. 59)).

17 Michelin v Commission, cited above, footnote 12.

18 See the judgment of 25 October 1983 in Case 107/82 AEG v Commission [1983] ECR 3193.

19 See Schwarze, Europäisches Verwaltungsrecht II, p. 1294, note 77, according to which undertakings in cartel cases are at all events entitled on request to production of a copy of the relevant documents.

20 On this point, see the attitude taken by the Court of Justice in AEC v Commission, cited above at footnote 17.

21 On this point, see K. P. E. Lasok, The European Court of Justice, Practice and Procedure, p. 260, footnote 4.

22 Judgment of 15 July 1970 in Case 41/69 ACF Chemiefarma v Commission [1970] ECR 661, paragraphs 91-93, p. 691 et seq.; and judgment of 29 October 1980 in Joined Cases 209 to 215 and 218/78 van Landewyck v Commission [1980] ECR 3125, paragraphs 67-74, p. 3244.

23 The German text refers to fortgesetzte Zusammenarbeit, which can mean constant cooperation but which naturally conveys the idea of fortgesetzte Handlung in the criminal law sense.

24 Cited above in footnote 21.

25 Cited above in foocnote 7.

26 Judgment of 10 July 1980 in Case 30/78 [1980] ECR 2229.

27 Distillers v Commission, cited in footnote 25; see in particular [1980] ECR 2294.

28 Judgment in Case 44/69 [1970] ECR 733, at p. 753.

29 Judgment of 14 July 1972 in Case 48/69 [1972] ECR 619, paragraphs 27 to 32, at p. 651.

30 Sec Schwane, p. 1349 and note 84.

31 See the judgment in Chemiefarma cited in footnote 21 [(1970] ECR 6*1, parigraphs 76 and 77, at p. 689).

32 Judgment of 15 July 1960 in Joined Cases 36, 37, 38 and 40/59, Präsident Ruhrkohlen-Verkaufsgesellschaft GmbH and Others v High Authority of the ECSC [1960] ECR 423.

33 Judgment of 1 July 1986 in Case 185/85 Union Sidérurgique du Nord et de l'Est de la France (Usinor) SA v Commission [1986] ECR 2079, paragraph 20 at p. 2098.

34 Judgment of 15 October 1987 in Case 222/86, UNECTEF v Heylens, [1987] ECR 4112.

35 Sec U. Everling in Wirtschaft und Wettbewerb, 1989, p. 877.

36 See OJ 1989 C 215 of 21 Ausust 1989, p. 1, containing the Council Decision of 24 October 1988 establishing a Court of First Instance, as published in OJ L 319 of 25 November 1988 and amended by the corrigtndum published in OJ L 241 of 17 August 1989.

37 judgment of 13 July 1966 in joined Cases 56 and 58/64 Etablissements Consten S.à r.l. and Grundig-Verkau/s-GmbH v Commission [1966] ECR 299. The same approach was taken later, see for instance the judgment of 21 February in Case 6/72 Continental Can [1973] ECR 215 (at paragraph 6, p. 240) and VBVB and VBBB cited above in footnote 16.

38 See footnote 21.

39 See footnote 7.

40 Judgment of 2 March 1983 in Case 7/82 Gesellschaft zur Verwertung von Leïstungsschutzrechten GmbH (GVL) v Commission [1983] ECR 483.

41 Judgment of 21 February 1984 in Case 86/82 Hasstlblad (GB) Limited v Commission [1984] ECR 883 (at p. 915, right-hand column).

42 Judgment of 16 December 1975 in Joined Cases 40/73 et al. Coöperatieve Vereniging Suiker Unie UA and Others v Commmion [1975] ECR 1663 (paragraph 111, at p. 1921).

43 See footnote 7 (paragraph 32, p. 3236).

44 OJ 1989 L 74, pp. 1 and 21 (Decisions of 21 December 1988, IV/31.865, PVC, and IV/31.866, LdPE).

45 See most recently, Rutsch, Strafrechtlicher Durchgriff hei verbundenen Unternehmen?, Cologne 1987, and Lipowsky, Die Zurechnung von Wetthewerbiventößen, Munien 1987.

46 Cited above, in footnote 41.

47 Judgment of 28 March 1984 in Joined Cases 29 and 30/83 Compagnie Royale Asturienne des Mines S.A. and Rhetnzmk GmbH v Commission [1984] ECR 1679.

48 See lhe Chemie/arma case, cited above in footnote 21, paragraphs 106-116.

49 See the Sandoz case.

50 Cited above in footnote 36.

51 See Hildebrandt: Der Irrtum im Bußgeldrecht der Europäischen Gemeinschaften, 1990, p. 40; Dannecker/Fischer-Frilsch, Das EG-Kartellrecht in der Bußgeldpraxis, p. 15; see also Grabitz, Kommentar zum EWG-Vertrag, on Anide 85, No 28.

52 See, in particular the judgment in Consten and Grundig, cited above in footnote 36.

53 See footnote 41.

54 See footnote 3.

55 Sec, for example, Mr Advocate General Mayras, [1972] ECR 666, at p. 669.

56 See U. S. v Krnel (U. S. Supr. Court 1910) 173 Fed. 823, 218 US 601, Multiflex, Inc. v Samuéi Moore 6 Co, and Eaton Corp. (5th Circ. 1983), 1983-2 Trade Cases, 65, 507, and American Tobacco Co. et al. v U. S. (CCA-6 1944), 1944-45 Trade Cases, 57, 317 (p. 57, 587).

57 Cahien de Droit Européen 1974, p. 258.

58 See Joseph Ellis: Source Material for Article 85(1) of the EEC Treaty in Fordham Law Review, Vol. XXXII 1963, No 2, p. 247-278.

59 Judgment of 14 July 1972 in Cise 48/69 Imperial Chemical Industriei Ltd v Commission [1972] ECR 619, and judgments of the same date in Cases 49/69, 51/69, 52/69, 53/69, 54/69, 55/69, 56/69 and 57/69.

60 See Piriou in Cahiers de Droit Européen, 1973, p. 52, and Joliét, op. cit. p. 266, and the further references contained in both articles.

61 See footnote 41 above.

62 Judgment of 14 July 1981 in Case 172/80 [1981] ECR 2021, cited in footnote 3 above.

63 Judgment of 15 July in Case 41/69 ACF Chemiejarma v Commission [1970] ECR 661, riled above in footnote 21.

64 At p. 714, right-hand column.

65 In its Judgment the Court of Justice did not deal with the distinction between an agreement and a concerted practice.

66 See footnote 28 [1972] ECR 619.

67 Sec footnote 7.

68 Sec footnote 7, [1983] ECR 1825, at p. 1929.

69 Judgment of 11 January 1990 in Case C-277/87, published in summary form in [1990] ECR I-45.

70 See footnote 56.

71 La Politique de la Concurrence dans la CEĶ ]977, a publication of l'Institut Universitaire International, Luxembourg, Editions UGA.

72 Droit Européen dei Affaires, Themis, Droit 1990, p. 278, Presses Universitaires de France.

73 Journal du Droit International, 1973, p. 925 (p. 938).

74 Cahiers de Droit Européen, 1973, p. 50.

75 Revue du Marché Commun, 1973, p. 17.

76 Kartelrecht, 1986.

77 Handbuch des Europäischen Rechts, Article 85, Nos 17 and 18, p. 106 et seq.

78 Kommentar zum EWG-Vertrag, Article 85, No 28, p. 10.

79 Common Market Law of Competition, Third Edition 1987, para. 2-040, p. 60.

80 Clunet, 1977, p. 219.

81 Droit Matériel et Politique de la Communauté Européenne, 1986, p. 163.

82 Das Wettbewerbsrecht der Europäischen Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft, Article 85, No 23, p. 799.

83 See section (d) above.

84 See Hans-Dieter Lübben: Das Verbot, abgestimmten Verbaltem im deutschen und europäischen Kartellrecht, p. 90 and note 51.

85 See Schröter in Croeben/Botch, op. cit. no 13, p. 103.

86 On this point, sec the judgment delivered by the Court of Justice on 29 February 1968 in Case 24/67 Parke Davis & Co v ProbeĻ Reese, Beintema-Interpharm and Centrapbarm [1968] ECR 55.

87 [1972] ECRaip. 687.

88 Judgment of 30 June 1966 in Case 56/65 Société Technique Minière v Maschinenbau Ulm GmbH [1966] ECR 235.

89 Judgment of 2 July 1969 in Case 5/69 fram Võik v S.p.r.L Ets J. Vervaecke [1969] ECR 295.

90 See, for example, K. P. E. Lasok, The European Court of Justice, Practice and Procedure, 1984, p. 263.

91 See above, footnote 41.

92 See section A, 5 c.

93 See the US case Hunt v Mobil Oil Corp. (Supreme Court, 1977) 465 F. Supp. 195, 231, according to which it is not sufficient in order for unlawful conduct to be regarded as proven for an undertaking to have been present at the place where the unlawful act was committed and possibly even to have had knowledge of others' unlawful conduct.

94 Note in this regard that Van Damme distances himself on this point from Joliet's criticism of the ICI judgment: La Politique de la Concurrence dans la CEĶ p. 150.

95 Judgment of 3 July 1985 m Cast 243/83 SA Binon and Cie v SA Agence el Menageries de la Prene [1985] ECR 2015.

96 Judgment of 25 June 1976 in Case 51/75 EMI Records Limitedv CBS United Kingdom Limited [1976] ECR 811.

97 Regulation (EEC) No 2988/74 of the Council of 26 November 1974 concerning limitation periods in proceedings and the enforcement of sanctions under the rules of the European Economic Community relating to transport and competition, OJ 1974 L 319, p. 1.

98 Sec footnote 92; see also the Opinion of Advocate General Sir Gordon Slynn in SA Musique Difįuuon Française v Commission (cited in footnote 2).

99 Case 101/80 C. Melchers & Co. v Commission, one of the Pioneer cases, cited in footnote 7.

100 Common Market Law of Competition, see footnote 78.

101 Decision of 14 December 1979, OJ 1980 L 60, p. 21.

102 See footnote 7.

103 Judgment of 12 July 1979 in Joined Cases 32/78 and 36-82/78 BMW Belgium v Commission [1979] ECR 2435 at p. 2494.

104 See footnote 43.

105 Commission decision of 19 December 1990 in Cases IV/33.133-A: Soda-ash — Solvay, ICI; IV/33.133-B: Soda-ash — Solvay, CFK; IV/33.133-C: Soda-ash—Solvay; and IV/33.133-D: Soda-ash —ICI (OJ 1991 L 152 pp. 1, 16, 21 and 40).

106 See for example, Mr Advocate General Warner in the BM Uncase, cited in footnote 102, at page 2493.

107 See the judgment of 10 December 1985 in Joined Cases 240-242, 261, 262, 268 and 269/82 Stichting Siįarettenin-äuitrie v Commission [19851 ECR 3831, at paragraph 82, p. 3881.

108 Judgment of 8 November 1983 in Joined Cases 96-102, 104, 105, 108 and 110/82 IAZ International Belgium v Commission (ANSEAUNAVEWA) [1983] ECR 3369 at paragraph 55, p. 3417.

109 See Bellamy and Child, op. cit., p. 497, text to note 56.