Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 52017XX0412(01)

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 5 October 2015 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39639 — Optical Disk Drives — Rapporteur: Austria

OJ C 117, 12.4.2017, p. 6–6 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

12.4.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/6

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive agreements and dominant position given at its meeting of 5 October 2015 regarding a draft decision relating to Case AT.39639 — Optical Disk Drives

Rapporteur: Austria

(2017/C 117/07)

1.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the anticompetitive behaviour covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practice between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

2.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment of the product and geographic scope of the agreement and/or concerted practice contained in the draft decision.

3.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision have participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

4.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practice was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101 of the TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement.

5.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practice have been capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU and the contracting parties of the EEA Agreement.

6.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringement.

7.

The Advisory Committee agrees with the Commission’s draft decision as regards the addressees, including the imputation of liability to parent companies of the groups concerned in the case.

8.

The Advisory Committee recommends the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Top