title: 2000/146/EC: Commission Decision of 14 December 1999 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 15(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 17 (Case No IV/34.237/F3 - Anheuser-Busch Incorporated - Scottish & Newcastle) (notified under document number C(1999) 4499) (Only the English text is authentic)

eurovoc_concepts:
beer
beverage industry
dominant position
inter-company agreement
restrictive trade practice

text: 22. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 49/37 II (Acts whose publication is not obligatory) COMMISSION COMMISSION DECISION of 14 December 1999 relating to a proceeding pursuant to Article 15(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 17 (Case No IV/34. 237/F3 — Anheuser-Busch Incorporated — Scottish & Newcastle) (notified under document number C(1999) 4499) (Only the English text is authentic) (2000/146/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962, First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1216/ 1999 (2), and in particular Article 15(1)(b) thereof, Having given the undertakings concerned the opportunity of being heard on the matters to which the Commission has taken objection, After having consulted the Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions, Whereas: I that opportunity. 1998 respectively. The parties were given the oppor- tunity to put forward their arguments orally, but both parties declined to use Instead, Anheuser-Busch Incorporated, Anheuser-Busch Euro- pean Trade Limited and Scottish & Newcastle submitted further replies to the Statement of Objections on 27 April and 6 May 1999 respectively. This Decision takes account of all the responses to the Statement of Objec- tions. II FACTS A. The undertakings concerned INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURE 1. Anheuser-Busch Incorporated (1) (2) This Decision is concerned with the supply of incorrect information in response to a formal request for informa- tion under Article 11(3) of Regulation No 17 addressed Scottish & to Anheuser-Busch Incorporated Newcastle plc. and (3) The Commission sent a Statement of Objections to the parties concerned on 4 August 1998. Anheuser-Busch Incorporated, Anheuser-Busch European Trade Limited and Scottish & Newcastle submitted their replies to the Statement of Objections on 16 October and 27 October (1) OJ 13, 21. 2. 1962, p. 204/62 (2) OJ L 148, 15. 6. 1999, p. 5. Arlheuser-Busch Incorporated (hereinafter ‘Anheuser- Busch Inc. ’) is the brewing subsidiary of Anheuser-Busch Companies Incorporated, based in St Louis, United States of America, and is the world's largest brewing organisation. Anheuser-Busch International Inc. is the company's international beer subsidiary, and was formed in 1981 to explore and develop markets outside the United States. Anheuser-Busch European Trade Limited (ABET), based in London, is the European subsidiary of Anheuser-Busch International Inc. and was formed to develop the sales, distribution and marketing of Anheuser-Busch brands in Europe. Both Anheuser-Busch Inc. and ABET are involved in this procedure and replied 1997 to the Commission's letter June of 3 L 49/38 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 22. 2. 2000 (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation No 17 and the Statement of Objections of 4 August 1998 (‘Anheuser- Busch’ being used hereinafter where Anheuser-Busch Incorporated and ABET were both involved in the procedure. ) In the United Kingdom, ‘Budweiser’ beer is the number one premium packaged lager. The worldwide turnover of Anheuser-Busch Companies Incorporated was USD 13,2 billion in 1998 (approxi- mately EUR 12,3 billion). 2. Scottish & Newcastle plc The Scottish & Newcastle (S & N) Group comprises three business divisions: brewing, pub retailing, and leisure. S & N's brewing business is based principally in the United Kingdom and Ireland, where it brews and distrib- utes its own brands and brews and/or distributes a number of other brands under licence. In August 1995, S & N acquired the brewing and distribution business of Courage Limited (hereinafter ‘Courage’). The combined United Kingdom brewing busi- nesses trade under the name Scottish Courage. These brewing activities represent 28 % of the UK beer market in volume production terms. S & N is the largest brewer in the United Kingdom. S & N's worldwide turnover for the year ended 3 May 1998 was GBP 3,352 billion (approximately EUR 5,06 billion). B. Case history On 24 February 1992, the Commission received a noti- fication pursuant to Articles 2 and 4 of Regulation No 17, by Anheuser-Busch and Courage, of agreements concerning the brewing, distribution and marketing of Budweiser beer in the United Kingdom. On 20 July 1993, the Commission received copies of the agree- ments as amended by the amending agreement of 14 May 1993. Following the sale of Courage's brewing business to S & N in August 1995, the Commission wrote to S & N on 11 January 1996 for confirmation of the continued operation of the brewing and/or purchase and distribu- tion agreements between Courage and third parties. By letter of 9 February 1996, S & N informed the Commis- sion that revised arrangements had been entered into between Courage and Anheuser-Busch Inc. in May 1995, that these new arrangements were novated to S & N (entered into by S & N, by way of a novation) on completion of the Courage acquisition in 1995 and that the Commission would be formally informed of the new arrangements shortly. (10) In response to a telephone conversation initiated by the Commission, S & N, by letter of 14 March 1997, informed the Commission that the relationship between Anheuser-Busch and S & N remained governed by the ‘original agreements of which the Commission was advi- sed’ in S & N's letter of 9 February 1996, that is to say, the 1995 Agreements, and that those agreements were still in the process of renegotiation. It was anticipated that this process would be completed within two months. Under those ‘original agreements’, ABET and S & N each controlled 50 % of the Stag brewing joint venture in Mortlake, south-west London, which brews and packages Budweiser beer for sale in the United Kingdom. S & N would then distribute Budweiser beer only to the United Kingdom on-trade beer market. By letter of 3 June 1997, the Commission services made a formal request for information pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation No 17 addressed to Anheuser-Busch Inc. and to S & N, and notified to ABET. In the letter the the Commission following: questions, including asked 13 Please give full details of any further changes ‘(3) to the agreements since the novation to S & N’ By letter of 2 July 1997, S & N and Anheuser-Busch gave a joint reply to the Commission's request for infor- mation of 3 June 1997. By this letter, the Commission was informed that the relationship between Anheuser- Busch Inc. , ABET and S & N remained governed by the May 1995 agreements and that these agreements were still in the process of renegotiation, which was expected to finish in July 1997. By the same letter, the Commission was informed, in relation to question 3 contained in the Annex to the letter of 3 June 1997, that: ‘There have been no further changes in the agreements since the novation [from Courage Limited to S & N]’. By the same letter, the Commission received 18 docu- ments concerning the revised arrangements entered into in May 1995. By letter of 17 December 1997 (hereinafter, the ‘warning the Commission services notified Anheuser- letter’), Busch and S & N that it had reached a preliminary assessment of the notified agreements as to their compa- tibility with Article 85 (now Article 81 ) of the EC Treaty. The Commission was of the opinion that the Beer Supply Agreement of 6 May 1995 contained restrictions contrary to Article 81 of the EC Treaty. These included Article 7 (and schedule 2) of the Beer Supply Agreement concerning the marketing and posi- tioning of the Budweiser beer in the United Kingdom. By letter of 16 February 1998, Anheuser-Busch and S & N gave a joint reply to the warning letter. By the same letter they informed the Commission that copies of the revised arrangements (as amended in July 1997) would be sent the same day by hand to the Commission. The Commission received a folder, containing 34 docu- ments, on 16 February 1998. (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) Document No 12 of this folder contained a copy of two letters dated 27 and 28 February 1997, both from Anheuser-Busch to Scottish Courage Limited. 22. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 49/39 (18) The letter of 27 February 1997 entitled ‘Budweiser marketing guidelines’ refers to an understanding between Anheuser-Busch and S & N regarding guidelines for the positioning and marketing of Budweiser in the United Kingdom. Attached to the letter, as schedule A, certain guidelines are set forth by Anheuser-Busch. The letter states, first, that Anheuser-Busch has communicated the Budweiser marketing guidelines, contained in schedule A, to its major brewer-wholesaler customers in the United Kingdom, and intends to ‘take appropriate steps to assure compliance with the Budweiser marketing guidelines in all material respects’. Secondly, the letter states that Anheuser-Busch ‘reserves the right to amend the Budweiser marketing guidelines at its sole discretion at any time and from time to time. Anheuser-Busch shall promptly communicate to Scottish Courage any amend- ments to the Budweiser marketing guidelines’. Thirdly, the letter states that ‘Scottish Courage hereby acknowl- edges receipt of the Budweiser marketing guidelines and pledges to use its reasonable efforts to ensure compli- ance with the Budweiser marketing guidelines by its sales staff and customers’. The content of the letter was signed ‘agreed and accepted’ by Scottish Courage Limited. (19) On 18 March 1998, the Commission met representa- tives of Anheuser-Busch and S & N to discuss the Commission's warning letter and the joint response of the parties. (20) By letter of 23 April 1998, the Strategy Director of S & N responded to informal requests for information the 18 March 1998 made by the Commission at meeting. He also drew to the Commission's attention the Budweiser marketing guidelines (described in recitals 17, 18 and 19). He noted that: ‘you may wish to consider the marketing guidelines issued by A-B after the supply agreement was executed but which form an integral part of that agreement. These should form part of the agreement pack sent to you and are also enclosed with this letter’. (21) The Commission issued a second warning letter on 13 July 1998, the core of which concerned the marketing discussion with the guidelines. After Commission concerning guidelines dated 27 February 1997, the parties replaced them by revised guidelines in December 1998. subsequent the III LEGAL ASSESSMENT Introduction (22) Under Article 15(1)(b) of Regulation No 17, the Commission may by decision impose on undertakings fines where, whether intentionally or negligently, they supply incorrect information in response to a request made pursuant to Article 11(3). (23) By letter of 3 June 1997, the Commission addressed to Anheuser-Busch Inc. and to S & N (and notified to ABET), a request for information pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation No 17. The purpose of the request for information was as described in the request for informa- tion: ‘to enable the Commission to assess the compati- bility of the notified agreements that are listed in the letter with the EC rules of Annex the EC competition, Treaty in full knowledge of the facts and their correct economic interpretation’. in particular, Article 85 of to this (24) In the letter including the following: the Commission asked 13 questions, Please give full details of any further changes ‘(3) to the agreements since the novation to S & N’. A. The parties supplied the Commission with incor- rect information 1. The Commission's assessment The reply to question 3 of the request for information was incorrect. By stating in the reply of 2 July 1997 that ‘there have been no further changes in the agreements since the novation,’ the parties have omitted the Budweiser marketing guidelines of 27 February 1997. These guidelines are, for Community competition law purposes, an agreement, since they have been issued and signed by Anheuser-Busch and signed ‘agreed and accep- ted’ on behalf of S & N. This view is confirmed by the extract in the letter of 23 April 1998 from Scottish Courage, ‘you may wish to consider the marketing guidelines issued by A-B after the supply agreement was executed but which now form an integral part of that agreement’. The reference to the word ‘Agreement’ must in this context refer to the 1995 agreement, because the guidelines, having been signed in February 1997, predate the July 1997 agreement. 2. The replies of the parties 2. 1. S c o t t i s h & N e w c a s t l e ' s a r g u m e n t s ( 3) S & N does not contest the facts on which the Commis- sion's legal assessment is based. S & N accepts the Commission's assessment the parties should have made reference to the Budweiser marketing guidelines of 27 February 1997 in their response to question 3 of the Commission's request of 3 June 1997 for information under Article 11 of Regula- tion No 17. that (25) (26) (27) (28) (3) S & N's reply of 27 October 1998 to the Statement of Objections and its further reply of 6 May 1999 are jointly dealt with. L 49/40 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 22. 2. 2000 (29) S & N submits that it regarded the Budweiser marketing guidelines as part of their overall arrangement with Anheuser-Busch from the time of their introduction. the notion of a bilateral agreement or understanding, where changes require the assent of both parties. 2. 2. A n h e u s e r - B u s c h ' s a r g u m e n t s ( 4) (36) (30) Anheuser-Busch does not contest the facts on which the Commission's legal assessment is based. (31) Anheuser-Busch does, however, contest the Commis- sion's legal assessment. Anheuser-Busch submits that the answer to question 3 in the Commission's request for information was only incorrect the Budweiser marketing guidelines are an agreement and if they repre- sent a change relative to the 1995 Beer Supply Agree- ment. if The guidelines are not an agreement (32) Anheuser-Busch submits that the request for informa- tion was issued in the context of an existing notification, so as to enable the Commission to assess the notified agreements. The 1995 Beer Supply Agreement is part of a complex series of agreements containing binding legal obligations that set out the terms of the legal relation- ship between Anheuser-Busch and Courage Limited. (33) Amongst those agreements, the Beer Supply Agreement contains contractually binding obligations on S & N to purchase and distribute Budweiser, to promote the Budweiser brand, and to observe certain rules regarding the marketing of Budweiser. The guidelines were communicated to S & N in February 1997 completely separate from the Beer Supply Agreement. (34) The guidelines do not constitute a legally binding agree- ment but are recommendations made by Anheuser- Busch as to steps which S & N could take in positioning Budweiser so as to promote its image as a premium lager. It is precisely because they have a different status from the Beer supply agreement that they are entitled ‘Recommended Budweiser positioning guidelines’. Since they are recommendations, the choice whether to adhere to the guidelines is left entirely to the discretion of S & N. The guidelines are therefore not a specific agree- ment with regard to the joint implementation of the marketing strategy and objectives for the Budweiser beer. (35) Not only are the guidelines recommendations and thus not an agreement for the purposes of Community law; they do not constitute a contract under English law either. The guidelines may be revised by Anheuser-Busch unilaterally at its sole discretion: this is inconsistent with (4) Anheuser-Busch's reply of 16 October 1998 to the Statement of Objections and its further reply of 27 April 1999 are jointly dealt with. The fact that S & N signed the cover letter to the guide- lines ‘agreed and accepted’ is not evidence that S & N accepted any obligations whatsoever. Rather, S & N was merely had communicated its then current brand positioning views in order to help S & N make its decisions about how to position the Budweiser beer it sells. that Anheuser-Busch acknowledging (37) Anheuser-Busch's it that intends statement to take appropriate steps to ensure compliance with the guide- lines in all material respects should not be interpreted as indicating that Anheuser-Busch would seek to enforce them in individual cases. This simply meant that, at its regular meetings with S & N, Anheuser-Busch would discuss any S & N sales policy which it regarded as incompatible with the guidelines and thus threatened to devalue the Budweiser brand. However, all final deci- sions on how to position Budweiser remained with S & N. S & N is under no obligation to comply with the guidelines and is free to disregard them. In practice, S & N departs from the guidelines, presumably when it determines that it is in its commercial interest to do so. Indeed, on one occasion, in response to comments by Anheuser-Busch, S & N had specifically referred to the unenforceable nature of the guidelines. (38) (39) The fact that the guidelines were included in the bundle of documents sent to the Commission as part of the response to the December 1997 warning letter does not imply that they are part of the 1997 agreements or that clearance or exemption was being sought for them. In their joint reply, Anheuser-Busch and S & N obviously sought to provide copies of the 1997 agreements, as the Commission was unaware of those agreements and drafted the warning letter on the basis of the 1995 agreements. Rather than merely providing a copy of the relevant contracts, for convenience and in order to be as helpful as possible to the Commission, the parties had supplied a file containing 34 documents, including the guidelines and other documents which are not part of the 1997 agreements. The guidelines are irrelevant in competition terms. They are specifically phrased as recommendations and are non-binding. The Court of Justice, in its judgment of 28 January 1986 in Case 161/84 Pronuptia (5), ruled that recommendations (even on price) fall outside Article 81(1). It is noteworthy that following discussions with the Commission in late 1998, Anheuser-Busch issued slightly revised guidelines to S & N which the Commis- sion has provisionally indicated as not falling within the scope of Article 81(1). (5) [1986] ECR 353. 22. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 49/41 The guidelines are not a change to the 1995 Beer Supply Agreement (issued in February 1997) set out any of the terms governing its relationship with Anheuser-Busch and thus were not an agreement. (40) Anheuser-Busch considers that its reply to question 3 of the Commission's request was, in itself, correct for a second reason, namely that the guidelines were not a ‘change to the agreements’, meaning the 1995 agree- ments. The cover letter to the guidelines makes it clear that they are in no way a part of or a change to the Beer Supply Agreement or the associated agreements but instead have a completely independent status. It would have been inappropriate to include them in documents which created legally binding relationships between Anheuser-Busch and S & N. (41) (42) The fact that the guidelines were not incorporated in the 1997 Beer Supply Agreement, which is a full restate- ment of the 1995 Beer Supply Agreement incorporating all amendments to it, and indeed the fact that they were unaffected by the 1997 renegotiation, shows that they were not a change to the 1995 agreements and form no part either of those agreements or of the replacement 1997 agreements. Further evidence is provided by Clause 20 of the Termination Agreement, which identifies those docu- ments which Anheuser-Busch and S & N considered to be part of the agreement between them, and provides that no other document contains any obligations on either party. Since the Termination Agreement contains no reference to the guidelines, they cannot be part of the July 1997 agreements or part of the 1995 agreements or have the status of those agreements. S & N's letter of 23 April 1998 (43) Anheuser-Busch is not a party to this letter, which was written unilaterally by S & N without Anheuser-Busch's knowledge. (44) The letter is not credible, as it was part of an attack on relationship between S & N and the commercial Anheuser-Busch, in particular the 1997 Beer Supply Agreement, and thus contradicts a number of statements which S & N had made in its joint submission with Anheuser-Busch that the Beer Supply Agreement falls outside the scope of Article 81(1). (45) The letter contradicts S & N's letter of 14 March 1997 to the Commission stating that the relationship between Anheuser-Busch and S & N remained governed by the ‘original agreements’, namely the 1995 agreements, which implies that S & N did not consider the guidelines 2. 3. T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s r e p l i e s (46) It should be noted that both parties concerned do not contest the facts on which the Commission has relied in its legal assessment. (47) Moreover, S & N accepts the Commission's assessment that the parties should have made reference to the Budweiser marketing guidelines of 27 February 1997 in their response to question 3 of the Commission's request for information of 3 June 1997. (48) However, Anheuser-Busch has put forward various argu- ments to contest the Commission's legal assessment. Anheuser-Busch's arguments will be dealt with below. The guidelines are an agreement (49) Any reference to English law by Anheuser-Busch is irrel- evant. This case concerns S & N's and Anheuser-Busch's answer to a letter sent on the basis of Article 11(3) of Regulation No 17 relating to a notification by the parties to the Commission under Community competition law. According to the case-law of the Court of Justice, in order for there to be an agreement within the meaning of Article 81(1), it is sufficient that the undertakings in question have expressed their joint intention to conduct themselves on the market in a specific way (see judg- ments of 15 July 1970 in Case 41/69 ACF Chemie- farma (6) and of 29 October 1980 in Joined Cases 209 to 215 and 218/78 Heintz van Landewyck (7)). (50) (51) (52) The Commission cannot accept Anheuser-Busch's view that the guidelines are mere recommendations and that the choice as to whether to adhere to the guidelines is left entirely to the discretion of S & N. By signing the cover letter to the guidelines as ‘agreed and accepted’, S & N agreed and accepted the content of the letter as a whole and was not merely acknowledging the communi- cation of the guidelines by Anheuser-Busch. In fact, the last sentence of the letter states: ‘if you are in agreement with the foregoing please execute the dupli- cate original of the correspondence and return a copy to me’. It is clear from the letters of Anheuser-Busch to S & N dated 27 and 28 February 1997 that the only inter- pretation possible is that S & N: (a) acknowledged the communication of the guidelines by Anheuser-Busch, and Anheuser-Busch's intention to ‘take appropriate steps to assure compliance with the Budweiser marketing guidelines in all material respects’; (b) assented to Anheuser-Busch's right to amend the guidelines; (6) [1970] ECR 661, at paragraph 112. (7) [1980] ECR 3125, at paragraph 86. L 49/42 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 22. 2. 2000 (c) acknowledged receipt of the guidelines and pledged ‘to use its reasonable efforts to ensure compliance with the Budweiser marketing guidelines by its sales staff and customers’. (53) To be sure, the guidelines may be revised by Anheuser- Busch unilaterally but as S & N pledges to use its reason- able efforts to ensure compliance, and S & N has agreed to and accepted those two elements of the letter, S & N also pledges to ensure compliance with such amended guidelines as Anheuser-Busch may wish to communi- cate. (54) Moreover, it is clear from the letter of 28 February that Anheuser-Busch did not in fact communicate the guide- lines unilaterally but had asked S & N for its comments on draft guidelines: ‘Scottish Courage's commitment is important to us (. ). We look forward to your response to our draft’. (55) Anheuser-Busch, in its reply to the Statement of Objec- tions, now claims that its intention ‘to take appropriate steps to assure compliance with the guidelines in all material aspects’ should not be interpreted as ‘indicating that Anheuser-Busch would seek to enforce them in individual cases’. (56) (57) (58) This is wholly unconvincing. S & N has agreed and accepted Anheuser-Busch's intention and has pledged ‘to use its reasonable efforts to ensure compliance (. )’. Moreover, Anheuser-Busch, in its letter of 27 February, has stressed that S & N's commitment to the guidelines is important to it. This clearly shows that the guidelines constitute an agreement between the parties. That the guidelines are called ‘recommended’ guidelines is in itself not sufficient to demonstrate that the guide- lines are not an agreement. Anheuser-Busch's reference to the ‘Pronuptia’ judgment is therefore irrelevant. that In its reply to the Statement of Objections Anheuser- Busch seems to suggest the Commission had accepted that the guidelines did not give rise to real competition problems. This presentation distorts the real facts. The Commission was particularly concerned about the guidelines, and even issued a second warning letter drawing the parties' attention to it. It was only after the second warning letter and the following discussions with the Commission that the parties withdrew the guide- lines. (59) In the light of the foregoing, the Commission disagrees with Anheuser-Busch, and considers the guidelines to constitute an agreement for the purposes of Community law. The guidelines are a change to the 1995 Beer Supply Agree- ment existing notification and to enable the Commission to assess the notified agreements. Included in the Beer Supply Agreement, and specifically Article 7 thereof, are obligations regarding the positioning and marketing of Budweiser. As the guidelines imposed further obligations with regard to the marketing and positioning of Budweiser beer, they materially changed the relationship between Anheuser-Busch and S & N as agreed in the Beer Supply Agreement. (61) The question whether or not the guidelines were incor- porated in the Beer Supply Agreement is wholly irrele- vant in determining whether they constituted a change to that Agreement. S & N's letter of 23 April 1998 (62) S & N's letter clearly indicates that S & N is and was of the view that the guidelines alter the overall arrange- ments between the parties in so far as the marketing and positioning of Budweiser is concerned. It may also be noticed that Anheuser-Busch, in its letter of 28 February, indicated that S & N's commitment to the guidelines was important to it. It is therefore wholly unconvincing that Anheuser-Busch in its reply to the Statement of Objec- tions now accuses S & N of misinterpreting the guide- lines in S & N's letter of 23 April 1998. B. The incorrect reply of the parties was negligent 1. The Commission's assessment (63) As the parties have, apart from failing to supply the Commission with the guidelines, cooperated with the Commission constructively, and as the Commission has no evidence that the guidelines were intentionally concealed from the Commission, the conclusion must be that the incorrect reply to the Commission's request under Article 11 was caused by negligence. 2. The arguments of the parties 2. 1. S & N ' s a r g u m e n t s ( 8) (64) S & N deeply regrets the omission from the parties' response and states that it was an oversight rather than the result of any intention to mislead the Commission. 2. 2 A n h e u s e r - B u s c h ' s a r g u m e n t s ( 9) (65) The answer cannot be intentionally incorrect: Anheuser- Busch did not answer the request for information so as deliberately to conceal the guidelines from the Commis- sion. (60) The Commission agrees with Anheuser-Busch that the request for information was issued in the context of an (8) See footnote 3. (9) See footnote 4. 22. 2. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 49/43 (66) Anheuser-Busch to the furnished guidelines the Commission on 16 February 1998. This was before the Commission was even aware of the existence of the guidelines. Anheuser-Busch felt confident that the guide- lines raised no significant competition problems and therefore would not have been embarrassed to discuss them openly with the Commission, as indeed it did after it had first the Commission had some preliminary concerns about them when it received a warning letter in July 1998. There is therefore no reason the for Anheuser-Busch to have wished to conceal guidelines from the Commission. learnt that (67) Negligence is essentially equivalent to reasonableness. Thus, if there is a reasonable explanation for the answer to the request for information, even if it was ultimately found to be incorrect, it cannot be negligent. Anheuser- Busch submits that it was reasonable to consider at the time of giving its answer that the guidelines are neither an agreement nor a change to the 1995 Beer Supply Agreement, for the following reasons. (a) They are very different in nature from the Beer Supply Agreement: one is a set of non-binding recommendations, the other is a set of binding obli- gations. (b) The Beer Supply Agreement is designed to formally regulate the details of supply relationship between Anheuser-Busch and S & N. The guidelines are issued for information purposes only. (c) As the Beer Supply Agreement contains binding it cannot be changed without legal obligations, another formal agreement. The guidelines were issued by Anheuser-Busch alone and can be changed unilaterally by Anheuser-Busch. (d) The guidelines did not change the 1995 Beer Supply Agreement, as is evidenced by the fact that they were not incorporated into the 1997 Beer Supply Agreement. 2. 3. T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s r e p l i e s (68) The Commission does not allege that the answer to its request for information was intentionally incorrect. (69) (70) The various arguments put forward by Anheuser-Busch as proof of its submission that it was reasonable at the time of giving its answer to suppose that the guidelines were neither an agreement nor a change to the 1995 Beer Supply Agreement, have been addressed. The Commission's conclusion as regards the nature of the guidelines is perfectly in line with the case-law of the Courts of the European Communities. As both parties should have ready access to legal advice, the Commis- sion disagrees with Anheuser-Busch's claim that it was reasonable not to have informed the Commission of the guidelines following its formal request for information. C. Article 15(1)(b) of Regulation No 17 1. The Commission's assessment (71) including the guidelines in the reply to the By not request for information, the proper investigation of the file has been hindered: the assessment made in the warning letter issued by the Commission on 17 December 1997 could not build on the parties' specific agreement, as indicated in the guidelines, with regard to the joint implementation of the marketing strategy and objectives for Budweiser beer. in particular, (72) In accordance with Article 15(1)(b) of Regulation No 17, a fine is appropriate, in view of the following considera- tions. (a) Supplying incorrect information to the Commission has a serious impact on the conduct of a case and, in particular, on the approach of the Commission outlined in the warning letter. (b) Anheuser-Busch Inc. is the largest brewer in the world and S & N is the largest brewer in the United Kingdom; and both have ready access to legal advice. 2. The arguments of the parties 2. 1. S c o t t i s h & N e w c a s t l e ' s a r g u m e n t s ( 10) (73) S & N hopes that in the circumstances the Commission will feel able to deal with the matter with a degree of leniency and conclude the procedure without the impo- sition of a fine. 2. 2. A n h e u s e r - B u s c h ' s a r g u m e n t s ( 11) (74) Anheuser-Busch submits believe that following factors should be borne in mind. it has that although it does not the infringed Article 15(1)(b), (a) This is not a case where the parties have tried to conceal a document from the Commission. Quite the contrary: the Commission learned of the guide- lines because the parties gave them voluntarily to the Commission. (b) Anheuser-Busch discussed openly and constructively with the Commission whether the guidelines might have had competition implications. Those discus- sions led to Anheuser-Busch's issuing slightly revised guidelines. The Commission has given its prelimi- nary opinion that the revised guidelines fall outside the scope of Article 81(1). In all other respects as well, Anheuser-Busch has fully cooperated with the Commission. (10) See footnote 3. (11) See footnote 4. L 49/44 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 22. 2. 2000 2. 3. T h e C o m m i s s i o n ' s r e a s o n i n g a s t o t h e HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: f i n e s (75) According to Article 15 (1)(b) of Regulation No 17 the Commission may by decision impose on undertakings or associations of undertakings fines from EUR 100 to EUR 5 000 where, they supply incorrect information in response to a request made pursuant to Article 11(3) of that Regulation. intentionally or negligently, Article 1 Anheuser-Busch Incorporated and Scottish & Newcastle plc have infringed Article 15(1)(b) of Regulation 17 by negligently supplying incorrect information in response to a request made pursuant to Article 11. (76) supply of The infringement which is the subject of this Decision is the negligent information by Anheuser-Busch and S & N, through their failure to submit the Recommended Budweiser positioning guide- lines in response to a formal request for information made pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation No 17. incorrect (77) As the Commission is dependent on the parties for a notification for the supply of correct information on the basis of which the Commission is able to assess the notified agreements, the supply of incorrect information to the Commission has a serious impact on the conduct of a case and, in particular in this case, the approach of the Commission services outlined in the warning letter. (78) Anheuser-Busch Inc. is the largest brewer in the world and S & N is the largest brewer in the United Kingdom and both have ready access to legal advice. (79) For the reasons set out in recital 72 the Commission considers the imposition of a fine to be appropriate. (80) However, the Commission has no evidence that the parties concealed the guidelines intentionally and the parties have, apart from the infringement, cooperated constructively and openly with the Commission. (81) (82) (83) (84) It should also be noted that the parties supplied the Commission with the guidelines voluntarily, on 16 February 1998. The Commission had not asked for the guidelines and was, at that time, not even aware of their It was thus only through the information existence. supplied by the parties themselves that the Commission discovered the guidelines. It follows that there was only a limited period of time during which the Commission was not in the possession of the correct information: between 2 July 1997 and 16 February 1998. The supply of incorrect information by the parties should not in this case, therefore, be regarded as a major infringement. For these reasons, the Commission considers it appro- priate to fix the amount of the fines at EUR 3 000 for Anheuser-Busch and EUR 3 000 for S & N. Since ABET is a 100 % subsidiary of Anheuser-Busch International Inc. , which in turn is a 100 % subsidiary of Anheuser-Busch Inc. and since moreover both ABET and Anheuser-Busch Inc. played a part in these proceedings, the Commission considers that both ABET and Anheuser-Busch Inc. are jointly and severally liable for the fine, Article 2 A fine of EUR 3 000 is hereby imposed on Anheuser-Busch Incorporated. A fine of EUR 3 000 is hereby imposed on Scottish & Newcastle plc. Article 3 The fines imposed under Article 2 shall be payable in euro within three months of the date of notification of this Decision to the following bank account of the European Commission: 310-0933000-43, Lambert, Agence Européenne, Rond-Point Schuman 5, B-1040 Brussels. Bruxelles Banque After the expiry of that period, interest shall automatically be payable at the rate applied by the European Central Bank to its repo operations on the first working day of the month in which this Decision was adopted, plus 3,5 percentage points, namely 6,5 %. Article 4 This Decision is addressed to: Anheuser-Busch Incorporated One Busch Place St Louis, MO 63188 USA Anheuser-Busch European Trade Limited 8 Devonshire Gardens Cutler's Gardens London EC2M 4LP United Kingdom Scottish & Newcastle plc 50 East Fettes Avenue Edinburgh EH4 1RR United Kingdom This Decision shall be enforceable pursuant to Article 256 of the Treaty. Done at Brussels, 14 December 1999. For the Commission Mario MONTI Member of the Commission


title: Regolamento (CE) n. 2638/1999 della Commissione, del 14 dicembre 1999, relativo alle domande di titoli di importazione di frumento tenero di qualità e di frumento duro di qualità nell'ambito dei contingenti tariffari di cui al regolamento (CE) n. 778/1999

eurovoc_concepts:
common wheat
durum wheat
import licence
product quality
tariff quota

formats: pdf print

text: L 323/10 IT Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee 15. 12. 1999 REGOLAMENTO (CE) N. 2638/1999 DELLA COMMISSIONE del 14 dicembre 1999 relativo alle domande di titoli di importazione di frumento tenero di qualità e di frumento duro di qualità nell'ambito dei contingenti tariffari di cui al regolamento (CE) n. 778/1999 LA COMMISSIONE DELLE COMUNITÀ EUROPEE, visto il trattato che istituisce la Comunità europea, visto il regolamento (CE) n. 1095/96 del Consiglio, del 18 giugno 1996, relativo all'attuazione delle concessioni figuranti nel calendario CXL stabilito nel quadro della conclusione dei negoziati a norma dell'articolo XXIV, paragrafo 6, del GATT (1), in particolare l'articolo 1, considerando che il regolamento (CE) n. 778/1999 della Commissione, del 15 aprile 1999, recante apertura e modalità di gestione di contingenti tariffari di 300 000 tonnellate di frumento di qualità e di 50 000 tonnellate di frumento duro e che abroga i regolamenti (CE) n. 529/97 e (CE) n. 2228/96 (2) reca disposizioni particolari in merito all'organizzazione delle importazioni nel quadro del contingente indetto dal regola- mento (CE) n. 1095/96; che, a norma dell'articolo 3, paragrafo 2, del regolamento (CE) n. 778/1999, la Commissione stabi- lisce una percentuale di riduzione delle quantità se le domande di titoli di importazione superano i quantitativi che possono essere importati; che le domande di titoli presentate fra il 24 ottobre e l'8 dicembre 1999 vertono su 304 270 tonnellate di frumento tenero di qualità, mentre la quantità massima che è possibile mobilitare ammonta a 100 000 tonnellate; che è necessario pertanto fissare la corrispondenza percentuale di riduzione per le domande di titoli di importazione presentate fra il 24 ottobre e l'8 dicembre 1999 e che beneficiano delle condizioni previste dal regolamento (CE) n. 1095/96; che le domande di titoli presentate fra il 24 ottobre e l'8 dicembre 1999 vertono su 145 845 tonnellate di frumento duro, mentre la quantità massima che è possibile mobilitare ammonta a 50 000 tonnellate; che è necessario pertanto fissare la corri- spondente percentuale di riduzione per le domande di titoli di importazione presentate fra il 24 ottobre e l'8 dicembre 1999 e che beneficiano delle condizioni previste dal regolamento (CE) n. 1095/96, HA ADOTTATO IL PRESENTE REGOLAMENTO: Articolo 1 Le domande di titoli di importazione, di cereali di frumento tenero di qualità, che beneficiano delle condizioni previste dal regolamento (CE) n. 1095/96, presentate fra il 24 ottobre e l'8 dicembre 1999 e comunicate alla Commissione, sono accolte limitatamente ai quantitativi ivi indicati previa applicazione del coefficiente di 0,329. Le domande non comunicate alla Commissione sono respinte. Articolo 2 Le domande di titoli di importazione di cereali di frumento duro di qualità, che beneficiano delle condizioni previste dal regolamento (CE) n. 1095/96, presentate fra il 24 ottobre e l'8 dicembre 1999 e comunicate alla Commissione, sono accolte limitatamente ai quantitativi ivi indicati, previa applicazione del coefficiente di 0,343. Le domande non comunicate alla Commissione sono respinte. Articolo 3 Il presente regolamento entra in vigore il 15 dicembre 1999. Il presente regolamento è obbligatorio in tutti i suoi elementi e direttamente applicabile in ciascuno degli Stati membri. Fatto a Bruxelles, il 14 dicembre 1999. Per la Commissione Franz FISCHLER Membro della Commissione (1) GU L 146 del 20. 6. 1996, pag. 1. (2) GU L 101 del 16. 4. 1999, pag. 36


title: 2000/379/EG: Entscheidung der Kommission vom 14. Dezember 1999 zur Festsetzung von Quoten für die Einfuhr der vollhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffe 11, 12, 113, 114 und 115, der übrigen vollhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffe, von Halonen, Tetrachlorkohlenstoff, 1,1,1-Trichlorethan, Fluorbromkohlenwasserstoffen und Methylbromid für den Zeitraum vom 1. Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 sowie zur Festsetzung von Quoten für das Inverkehrbringen von teilhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen für den Zeitraum vom 1. Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 (Bekanntgegeben unter Aktenzeichen K(1999) 4434) (Text von Bedeutung für den EWR) (Nur der spanische, dänische, deutsche, englische, französische, griechische, italienische, niederländische, portugiesische und schwedische Text sind verbindlich)

eurovoc_concepts:
chemical product
dangerous substance
free circulation
marketing standard
ozone
quantitative restriction

formats: html pdf print

text: 10. 6. 2000 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 139/31 II (Nicht veröffentlichungsbedürftige Rechtsakte) KOMMISSION ENTSCHEIDUNG DER KOMMISSION vom 14. Dezember 1999 zur Festsetzung von Quoten für die Einfuhr der vollhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffe 11, 12, 113, 114 und 115, der übrigen vollhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffe, von Halonen, Tetrachlorkohlenstoff, 1,1,1-Trichlorethan, Fluorbromkohlenwasserstoffen und Methyl- bromid für den Zeitraum vom 1. Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 sowie zur Festsetzung von Quoten für das Inverkehrbringen von teilhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen für den Zeitraum vom 1. Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 (Bekanntgegeben unter Aktenzeichen K(1999) 4434) (Nur der spanische, dänische, deutsche, englische, französische, griechische, italienische, niederländische, portu- giesische und schwedische Text sind verbindlich) (Text von Bedeutung für den EWR) (2000/379/EG) DIE KOMMISSION DER EUROPÄISCHEN GEMEINSCHAFTEN — (3) gestützt auf den Vertrag zur Gründung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft, gestützt auf die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates vom 15. Dezember 1994 über Stoffe, die zum Abbau der Ozon- schicht führen (1), insbesondere auf Artikel 4 Absatz 8 und Artikel 7 Absatz 2, in Erwägung nachstehender Gründe: (1) (2) Nach Artikel 7 Absatz 1 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/ 94 des Rates unterliegt die Überführung der aus Dritt- ländern eingeführten geregelten Stoffe in den zollrecht- lich freien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft unbeschadet des Artikels 4 Absatz 8 und sofern es sich nicht um Stoffe handelt, die mittels eines von den Vertragsparteien aner- kannten Verfahrens vernichtet oder als Ausgangsstoffe zur Herstellung anderer Chemikalien bzw. zu Quarantä- nezwecken und für die Behandlung vor dem Transport verwendet werden sollen, mengenmäßigen Beschrän- kungen. Die mengenmäßigen Beschränkungen für die Überfüh- rung geregelter Stoffe in den zollrechtlich freien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft sind in Anhang II und Artikel 4 Absatz 8 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates aufgeführt. Diese Beschränkungen können nach Artikel 7 Absatz 3 geändert werden. (1) ABl. L 333 vom 22. 12. 1994, S. 1. Etwaige Änderungen dieser mengenmäßigen Beschrän- kungen dürfen auf keinen Fall zur Folge haben, dass der Verbrauch an geregelten Stoffen in der Gemeinschaft die gemäß dem Montrealer Protokoll über Stoffe, die zum Abbau der Ozonschicht führen, festgelegten mengenmä- ßigen Beschränkungen übersteigt. (4) (5) (6) Artikel 4 Absatz 8 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates legt den berechneten Umfang an teilhaloge- nierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen (H-FCKW) fest, den Hersteller und Importeure in dem Zeitraum vom 1. Januar bis 31. Dezember 1995 und in jedem Zwölfmo- natszeitraum danach insgesamt in Verkehr bringen oder für den eigenen Bedarf verwenden dürfen, fest. Dies entspricht einer Menge von 8079 OAP-t. Nach Artikel 4 Absatz 8 teilt die Kommission gemäß dem Verfahren des Artikels 16 jedem Hersteller oder Importeur zu dem Zeitpunkt, da die Gesamtmenge H- FCKW, die Hersteller und Importeure in Verkehr bringen oder für den eigenen Bedarf verwenden, 80 % der festge- legten mengenmäßigen Beschränkung erreicht hat, oder spätestens am 1. Januar 2000, eine Quote zu. In den Jahren 1997 und 1998 wurde der Schwellenwert von 80 % erreicht. Vermutlich wird dies auch 1999 der Fall sein, weshalb es erforderlich ist, Quoten für das Inverkehrbringen von H-FCKW im Jahre 2000 zuzu- teilen. L 139/32 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften 10. 6. 2000 (7) (8) (9) Nach Artikel 7 Absatz 2 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/ 94 des Rates teilt die Kommission den Unternehmen jedes Jahr gemäß dem Verfahren des Artikels 16 Quoten für geregelte Stoffe zu. Die Kommission hat eine Bekanntmachung an EG- Importeure von geregelten ozonabbauenden Stoffen (1) veröffentlicht, in deren Folge ihr Anträge auf Einfuhr- quoten gestellt wurden. Die Einfuhr von Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen 11, 12, 113, 114 und 115, anderen vollhalogenierten Fluor- chlorkohlenwasserstoffen, Halonen, Tetrachlorkohlen- stoff, 1,1,1-Trichlorethan und Fluorbromkohlenwasser- stoffen in die Gemeinschaft ist gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates untersagt; ausgenommen ist die Einfuhr zur Verwendung als Ausgangsstoff, zur Vernichtung und für wesentliche Verwendungszwecke. Die Einfuhr zur Verwendung als Ausgangsstoff und zur Vernichtung ist gemäß der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/ 94 des Rates nicht durch Quoten beschränkt. Quoten für wesentliche Verwendungszwecke werden durch eine gesonderte Kommissionsentscheidung genehmigt. (10) Die Zuteilung individueller Quoten für Hersteller und Importeure erfolgt auf der Grundlage des Kontinuitäts-, Gleichwertigkeits- und Proportionalitätsprinzips. Bei der Festlegung von Quoten geht die Kommission von der Notwendigkeit aus, die Herstellung, Einfuhr und Verwen- dung von Stoffen, die sich nachteilig auf die Ozon- schicht auswirken, weiterhin abzubauen und dabei möglichst wenig in den Markt einzugreifen. (11) Die Einfuhrquoten für Methylbromid werden Primärim- porteuren gewährt. Die Kommission betrachtet als solche die Importeure, die mit den Herstellern außerhalb der Gemeinschaft im Wege der Rechnungsstellung direkt verhandeln. Eine Reserve von 100,6 OAP-t Methyl- bromid wird für die Zuteilung im Jahre 2000 gemäß dem Verfahren des Artikels 16 bereitgehalten. (12) Es ist angezeigt, einen Teil der Gesamtquoten für das Inverkehrbringen von H-FCKW für Importeure in der Gemeinschaft vorzusehen, die keine H-FCKW herstellen. 1998 und 1999 beträgt der Umfang der Importe 4 % der insgesamt zur Verfügung stehenden Quoten. Daher ist es angezeigt, 2000 4 % der Gesamtquoten für Zutei- lungen an Importeure vorzusehen, die keine H-FCKW herstellen. Dies entspricht einer Menge von 323 OAP-t. (13) Die Quote für das Inverkehrbringen von H-FCKW für den einzelnen Hersteller in der Gemeinschaft im Jahr 2000 entspricht dem Marktanteil, den dieser Hersteller 1996 erreicht hat, umgerechnet in OAP-t. Es ist ange- zeigt, das Jahr 1996 als Basisjahr vorzusehen. Es wird als angemessen erachtet, die gesamte verfügbare Menge H- FCKW, d. h. 7756 OAP-t, auf die Hersteller zu verteilen und auf Reserven zu verzichten. (14) Einfuhrlizenzen werden von der Kommission gemäß Artikel 6 der vorgenannten Verordnung erteilt, nachdem geprüft wurde, ob die Importeure die Bestimmungen der Artikel 7, 8 und 12 eingehalten haben. (1) ABl. C 208 vom 22. 7. 1999, S. 5. (15) Die Überführung von aus Nicht-Parteiländern einge- führten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen 11, 12, 113, 114 und 115, anderen vollhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlen- wasserstoffen, Halonen, Tetrachlorkohlenstoff, 1,1,1- Trichlorethan und Fluorbromkohlenwasserstoffen in den zollfreien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft ist nach Artikel 8 der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates untersagt. (16) Die in dieser Entscheidung vorgesehenen Maßnahmen entsprechen der Stellungnahme des in Artikel 16 dieser Verordnung genannten Ausschusses — HAT FOLGENDE VERORDNUNG ERLASSEN: Artikel 1 (1) Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates geregelte Menge an Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen 11, 12, 113, 114 und 115, die 2000 aus Versorgungsquellen außerhalb der Europäischen Gemeinschaft in den zollfreien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft überführt werden darf, beträgt 0 OAP-t. Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates (2) geregelte Menge anderer vollhalogenierter Fluorchlorkohlen- wasserstoffe, die 2000 aus Versorgungsquellen außerhalb der Europäischen Gemeinschaft in den zollfreien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft überführt werden darf, beträgt 0 OAP-t. (3) Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates geregelte Menge an Halonen, die 2000 aus Versorgungsquellen außerhalb der Europäischen Gemeinschaft in den zollfreien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft überführt werden darf, beträgt 0 OAP-t. (4) Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates geregelte Menge an Tetrachlorkohlenstoff, die 2000 aus Versor- gungsquellen außerhalb der Europäischen Gemeinschaft in den zollfreien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft überführt werden darf, beträgt 0 OAP-t. (5) Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates geregelte Menge an 1,1,1-Trichlorethan, die 2000 aus Versor- gungsquellen außerhalb der Europäischen Gemeinschaft in den zollfreien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft überführt werden darf, beträgt 0 OAP-t. Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates (6) geregelte Menge an Methylbromid, die 2000 in den zollfreien Verkehr der Europäischen Gemeinschaft überführt werden darf, beträgt 5 870 OAP-t unbenutztes Material zu anderen Verwen- dungszwecken als Ausgangsstoff, Quarantäne und Behandlung vor dem Transport. (7) Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates geregelte Menge an Fluorbromkohlenwasserstoffen, die 2000 aus Versorgungsquellen außerhalb der Europäischen Gemein- schaft in den zollfreien Verkehr der Gemeinschaft überführt werden darf, beträgt 0 OAP-t. Artikel 2 (1) Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates geregelte Menge an teilhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasser- stoffen, die Hersteller und Importeure 2000 in der Gemein- schaft für den eigenen Bedarf in Verkehr bringen oder verwenden dürfen, beträgt 8 079 OAP-t. 10. 6. 2000 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 139/33 Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates (2) geregelte Menge an teilhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasser- stoffen, die Hersteller 2000 in der Gemeinschaft in Verkehr bringen oder für den eigenen Bedarf verwenden dürfen, beträgt 7 756 OAP-t. (3) Die durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates geregelte Menge an teilhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasser- stoffen, die Importeuren in der Gemeinschaft, die keine H- FCKW herstellen, 2000 von der Kommission zugeteilt wird, beträgt 323 OAP-t. Die Einfuhrquoten für Methylbromid für den Zeitraum (3) vom 1. Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 sind in Anhang IV (1) dieser Verordnung enthalten. (4) Die Quoten für das Inverkehrbringen oder die Verwen- dung von teilhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen für den eigenen Bedarf durch Hersteller und Importeure in der Gemeinschaft Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 sind in Anhang V (1) dieser Verordnung enthalten. für den Zeitraum vom 1. Artikel 3 Artikel 4 (1) Die Einfuhrquoten für Methylbromid für den Zeitraum Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 werden für die in vom 1. Anhang II dieser Verordnung genannten Zwecke und Unter- nehmen erteilt. (2) Die Quoten für das Inverkehrbringen oder die Verwen- dung von teilhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen für den eigenen Bedarf durch Hersteller und Importeure in der Gemeinschaft Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 werden für die in Anhang III dieser Verord- nung genannten Unternehmen erteilt. für den Zeitraum vom 1. Diese Entscheidung ist an die in Anhang I genannten Unter- nehmen gerichtet. Brüssel, den 14. Dezember 1999 Für die Kommission Margot WALLSTRÖM Mitglied der Kommission (1) Anhänge IV und V werden nicht veröffentlicht, weil sie firmenver- trauliche Informationen enthalten. L 139/34 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften 10. 6. 2000 ANEXO I — BILAG I — ANHANG I — ΠΑΡΑΡΤΗΜΑ Ι — ANNEX I — ANNEXE I — ALLEGATO I — BĲLAGE I — ANEXO I — LIITE I — BILAGA I AlliedSignal Fluorochemicals Europe BV Kempenweg 90 Postbus 264 6000 AG Weert Nederland Ausimont SpA Via S. Pietro, 50/a 20021 Bollate-MI Italy Chemical Industries of Northern Greece S. A. Thessaloniki Plant PO Box 10 183 GR 541 10 Thessaloniki DuPont de Nemours (Nederland) BV Baanhoekweg 22 33700 AC Dordrecht Nederland Elf Atochem S. A. Cours Michelet — La Défense 10 F-92091 Paris La Défense ICI Klea PO Box 13, The Health Runcorn, Cheshire WA7 4QF United Kingdom Rhodia Ltd PO Box 46-St Andrews Road Avonmouth Bristol BS11 9YF United Kingdom Solvay Fluor und Derivate GmbH Hans-Böckler-Allee 20 D-30173 Hannover Agroquímicos de Levante SA Avda. Primado Reig, 129, 4o B E-46020 Valencia Albemarle SA Parc Scientifique Einstein Rue du Bosquet 9 B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve Alfa Agricultural Supplies S. A. 13, Tim. Filimonos str GR-11521 Athens Biochem Ibérica Apartado 250, Jardia P-2870 Montijo Eurobrom BV Postbus 158 2280 AD Rĳswĳk Nederland Great Lakes Chemical (Europe) Ltd PO Box 44, Oil Sites Road Ellesmere Port South Wirral L65 4GD United Kingdom Mebrom NV Assenedestraat 4 B-9940 Rieme-Ertvelde Neoquímica Apartado 97 P-2580 Carregado AB Ninolab Box 137 S-194 22 Upplands Väsby ADVchem La Carretera, 31 E-08776 Sant Pere de Ruidebitlles A-Gas Limited Banyard Road Portbury West Bristol BS20 7XH United Kingdom Alcobre SA Luis I, nave 6-B E-28031 Madrid Arthur Friedrichs Nachfolger Bei den Kämpen 22 D-21220 Seevetal Asahi Glass Europe BV World Trade Center Strawinskylaan 1525 1077 XX Amsterdam Nederland Avenue Bleue International 23-25, rue Jean-Jacques Rousseau F-75001 Paris Bayer Hispania SA Pau Clarís, 196 E-08037 Barcelona Boucquillon NV Nĳverheidslaan 38 B-8540 Deerlĳk C. P. Chemicals Via de Amicis, 49 20123 Milano Italy Calorie 503, rue Hélène-Boucher ZI Buc BP 33 F-78534 Buc Cedex Celotex Limited Warwick House 27/31 St Mary's Road Ealing London W5 5PR United Kingdom Dinagas SA Polígono industrial Calonge Aviación, 4 E-41007 Sevilla Eco Pur SL Verge del Pilar, 17 E-43420 Santa Coloma de Queralt Edulan A/S Jens Olsens Vej 3 Skejby DK-8200 Århus N 10. 6. 2000 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 139/35 Efisol 14-24, rue des Agglomérés F-92024 Nanterre Cedex Fibran S. A. 6th km Thessaloniki Oreokastro P. O. Box 40306 GR-560 10 Thessaloniki Fiocco Trade SL Molina, 16, puerta 5 E-46006 Valencia Galco SA Avenue Carton de Wiart 79 B-1090 Bruxelles Galex SA BP 128 F-13321 Marseille Cedex 16 Gasco NV Assenedestraat 4 B-9940 Rieme-Ertvelde Gerling Holz & Co. Handels AG Ruhrstraße 113 D-22761 Hamburg Greencool Refrigerants Unit 12 Park Gate Business Centre Chandlers Way Park Gate Southampton SO31 1FQ United Kingdom Guido Tazzetti & Co. Strada Settimo, 266 10156 Torino Italy H & H International Ltd Richmond Bridge House 419 Richmond Road Richmond TW1 2EX United Kingdom HRP Refrigerants Ltd Gellihirion Industrial Estate Pontypridd CF37 5SX United Kingdom ICC Chemicals (UK) Ltd Northbridge Road Berkhamsted Hertfordshire HP4 IEF United Kingdom Inquinosa Internacional SA Hermanos Escartín, 7 E-28224 Pozuelo de Alarcón Kal y Sol Polígon industrial Can Roca Sant Martí, s/n E-08107 Martorelles Nagase Europe Ltd Crown House 143 Regent Street London WIR 7LB United Kingdom Plasfi SA Ctra. de Montblanc, s/n E-43420 Santa Coloma de Queralt Polar Cool SL Polígono industrial Ventorro del Cano Valdemorillo, 8 E-28925 Alcorcón Poliuretanos SA Camí de Matamala, s/n E-17244 Cassà de la Selva Promosol Boulevard Henri Cahn BP 27 F-94363 Bry-sur-Marne Cedex Proquisa SA Zona industrial Alto do Colaride, Agualva P-2735-208 Cacém lote F1 Pur Products Limited 7 Beeston Hall Mews Beeston, Tarporley Cheshire CW6 9TZ United Kingdom Quifar SA Zona industrial Alto do Colaride, Agualva P-2735-208 Cacém lote F1 Quimidroga SA Tuset, 26 E-08006 Barcelona Recticel NV Damstraat 2 B-9230 Wetteren Refrigeramt Products Ltd. N9 Central Park Estate Westinghouse Road Trafford Park Manchester M17 1PG United Kingdom Resina Chemie BV Korte Groningerweg 1A 9607 PS Foxhol Nederland RPS Europe SL Garraf, 39, 1o 3a E-08905 Hospitalet de Llobregat Service „Chimie“ 5, place de l'Église F-77400 Saint-Thibault SJB Chemical Products BV Wellerondon 11 3231 XV Brielle Nederland Sotragal SA Rue de Bourgogne F-69802 Saint-Priest Cedex L 139/36 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften 10. 6. 2000 Stag, SA Camino Hormigueras, 100 E-28030 Madrid Stagi International SA Lituania, 2 E-28030 Madrid Secours Froid 61-64 Centre commercial „Le Pérou“ Petit-Pérou F-97139 Abymes — Guadeloupe Synthesia Española SA Comte Borrel, 62 E-08015 Barcelona Universal Chemistry & Technology (U. C. T. ) SpA V. le A. Filippetti, 20 20122 Milano Italy Visteon/Ford Electrónica Portuguesa Estrada Nacional 252 — km 12 Parque industrial das Carrascas Volta da Pedra P-2950 Palmela 10. 6. 2000 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften L 139/37 ANHANG II GRUPPE VI Einfuhrquoten für Methylbromid für Importeure aufgrund der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 3093/94 des Rates zur Verwendung als Bodenbegasungsmittel und zu anderen Zwecken, für die Quoten festgelegt wurden UNTERNEHMEN Agroquímicos de Levante (E) Albemarle (B) Alfa Supplies (GR) Biochem Ibérica (P) Eurobrom (NL) Great Lakes (UK) Mebrom (B) Neoquímica (P) L 139/38 DE Amtsblatt der Europäischen Gemeinschaften 10. 6. 2000 ANHANG III Quoten für das Inverkehrbringen oder die Verwendung von teilhalogenierten Fluorchlorkohlenwasserstoffen für den eigenen Bedarf durch Hersteller und Importeure in der Gemeinschaft im Zeitraum vom 1. Januar bis 31. Dezember 2000 für die unten genannten Unternehmen. HERSTELLER AlliedSignal (NL) Ausimont (I) CING (GR) DuPont (NL) Elf Atochem (E, F) ICI (UK) Rhodia (UK) Solvay (B, D, F) IMPORTEURE AB Ninolab (S) ADVchem (E) A-Gas Limited (UK) Alcobre (E) Arthur Friedrichs Nachfolger (D) Asahi Glass (NL) Avenue Bleue International (F) Bayer Hispania (E) Boucquillon (B) C. P. Chemicals (I) Calorie (F) Celotex (UK) Dinagás (E) ECO PUR (E) Edulan A/S (DK) Efisol (F) Fibran (GR) Fiocco (E) Galco (B) Galex (F) Gasco (B) Gerling Holz & Co. Handels AG (D) Greencool (UK) Guido Tazzetti (I) H&H International (UK) HRP Refrigerants (UK) ICC Chemicals (UK) Inquinosa Internacional (E) Kal y Sol (E) Nagase & Co. (UK) Plasfi (E) Polarcool (E) Poliuretanos SA (E) Promosol (F) Proquisa (P) Pur Products (UK) Quifar (P) Quimidroga (E) Recticel (B) Refrigeration Prod. (UK) Resina Chemie BV (NL) RPS Europe (E) Service Chimie (F) SJB Chemical (NL) Sotragal SA (F) Stag, SA (E) Stagi (E) Secours Froid (F) Synthesia Española (E) U. C. T. (I) Visteon (P)


title: Nařízení Rady (ES) č. 2701/1999 ze dne 14. prosince 1999, kterým se mění nařízení (ES) č. 2201/96 o společné organizaci trhů s produkty zpracovanými z ovoce a zeleniny

eurovoc_concepts:
Portugal
common organisation of markets
fruit product
pip fruit
vegetable product

text: 462 CS Úřední věstník Evropské unie 03/sv. 27 31999R2701 21. 12. 1999 ÚŘEDNÍ VĚSTNÍK EVROPSKÝCH SPOLEČENSTVÍ L 327/5 NAŘÍZENÍ RADY (ES) č. 2701/1999 ze dne 14. prosince 1999, kterým se mění nařízení (ES) č. 2201/96 o společné organizaci trhů s produkty zpracovanými z ovoce a zeleniny RADA EVROPSKÉ UNIE, s ohledem na Smlouvu o založení Evropské unie, a zejména na článek 37 této smlouvy, s ohledem na návrh Komise, s ohledem na stanovisko Evropského parlamentu (1), stanoví na 83 468 tun a pro rok 2000/01 se vypočítá nahrazením skutečně zpracovaného množství v hospo- dářském roce 1997/98 množstvím 884 592 tun, které bylo Portugalsku původně přiděleno. (4) Toto nařízení se týká hospodářského roku 1999/2000. Tento hospodářský rok byl zahájen 15. června 1999. Toto nařízení by se mělo použít od tohoto data, ohledem na s výboru (2), stanovisko Hospodářského a sociálního PŘIJALA TOTO NAŘÍZENÍ: vzhledem k těmto důvodům: (1) (2) (3) Článek 6 nařízení (ES) č. 2201/96 (3) stanoví, že kvóta stanovená pro poskytování podpory na produkty zpra- cované z rajčat se každoročně rozdělí mezi členské státy. Pro hospodářský rok 1999/2000 se toto rozdělení stanoví na základě průměrného množství vyrobeného v souladu s minimálními cenami během hospodářských let 1997/98 a 1998/99. Počínaje hospodářským rokem 2000/01 se kvóta bude vypočítávat na základě průměr- ného množství vyrobeného během tří hospodářských let předcházejících hospodářskému roku, pro který se rozdělení provádí. Hospodářský rok 1997/98 se v Portugalsku vyznačoval výrazně nepříznivými klimatickými podmínkami, které vedly k nezvykle ostrému poklesu produkce. Přidělení kvót s ohledem na tuto nezvykle nízkou produkci v Portugalsku nebere v úvahu produkční potenciál běžných klimatických tohoto členského státu za podmínek. Je vhodné přidělit Portugalsku výjimečně a pouze pro dva hospodářské roky 1999/2000 a 2000/01, kterých se nezvyklý propad produkce rajčat pro zpracování týká, doplňkovou kvótu pro výrobu rajčatového koncentrátu, aby ztráta kvóty, k níž došlo v důsledku neobvyklých podmínek v roce 1997/98, aniž by byli poškozeni producenti v ostatních členských státech; toto doplňkové množství se pro rok 1999/2000 tak nahradila se Článek 1 V článku 6 nařízení (ES) č. 2201/96 se vkládá nový odstavec, který zní: „3a. Odchylně od odstavce 3 se pro hospodářské roky 1999/2000 a 2000/01 Portugalsku přiděluje doplňkové množství čerstvých rajčat určených pro výrobu rajčatového koncentrátu. Toto množství činí: — 83 468 tun pro rok 1999/2000 a — pro rok 2000/01 rozdíl mezi množstvím vypočítaným v souladu s odstavcem 3 a množstvím, které bylo čerstvých rajčat vypočítáno nahrazením množství použitých koncentrátu v hospodářském roce 1997/98 za 884 592 tun. v Portugalsku výrobu na Množství čerstvých rajčat uvedené v odstavci 1 a množství čerstvých rajčat určených k výrobě koncentrátu uvedené v odst. 2 druhém pododstavci první odrážce se pro zmíněné dva hospodářské roky zvýší o doplňkové množ- ství přidělené Portugalsku. “ Článek 2 (1) Stanovisko předložené 2. prosince 1999 (dosud nezveřejněné v Úředním věstníku). (2) Stanovisko předložené 20. v Úředním věstníku). října 1999 (dosud nezveřejněné (3) Úř. věst. L 297, 21. 11. 1996, s. 29. Nařízení naposledy pozměněné nařízením (ES) č. 2199/97 (Úř. věst. L 303, 6. 11. 1997, s. 1). Toto nařízení vstupuje v platnost dnem vyhlášení v Úředním věstníku Evropských společenství. Použije se ode dne 15. června 1999. 03/sv. 27 CS Úřední věstník Evropské unie 463 Toto nařízení je závazné v celém rozsahu a přímo použitelné ve všech členských státech. V Bruselu dne 14. prosince 1999. Za Radu předseda K. HEMILÄ


title: Nařízení Rady (ES) č. 2703/1999 ze dne 14. prosince 1999, kterým se mění nařízení (ES) č. 2596/97, kterým se prodlužuje období stanovené v čl. 149 odst. 1 aktu o přistoupení Rakouska, Finska a Švédska

eurovoc_concepts:
Finland
Sweden
marketing standard
milk
milk fat
transitional period (EU)

text: 468 CS Úřední věstník Evropské unie 03/sv. 27 31999R2703 21. 12. 1999 ÚŘEDNÍ VĚSTNÍK EVROPSKÝCH SPOLEČENSTVÍ L 327/11 NAŘÍZENÍ RADY (ES) č. 2703/1999 ze dne 14. prosince 1999, kterým se mění nařízení (ES) č. 2596/97, kterým se prodlužuje období stanovené v čl. 149 odst. 1 aktu o přistoupení Rakouska, Finska a Švédska RADA EVROPSKÉ UNIE, s ohledem na akt o přistoupení Rakouska, Finska a Švédska, a zejména na čl. 149 odst. 2 tohoto aktu, (3) Zdá se být rovněž vhodné zjistit v polovině období, jaký pokrok uvedené členské státy udělaly při uplatňování režimu Společenství, s ohledem na návrh Komise (1), PŘIJALA TOTO NAŘÍZENÍ: s ohledem na stanovisko Evropského parlamentu (2), Článek 1 vzhledem k těmto důvodům: V článku 1 nařízení nahrazuje tímto: (ES) č. 2596/97 se druhý pododstavec (1) (2) Ustanovení čl. 1 druhého pododstavce nařízení (ES) č. 2596/97 (3) prodlužují až do 31. prosince 1999 období, v němž mohou být přijímána přechodná opatření, pokud jde o požadavky týkající se obsahu tuku v mléce Finsku a Švédsku; obtíže s přizpůsobením, které si vyžádaly uvedená přechodná opatření, nelze překonat do 31. pro- since 1999. určeném k lidské spotřebě ve Je proto třeba využít možnost, stanovenou v aktu o při- stoupení dotyčného období; další období čtyř let se zdá být přiměřené. z roku 1994, k prodloužení „Toto období se však prodlužuje až do 31. prosince 2003, pokud jde o požadavky týkající se obsahu tuku v mléce určeném k lidské Finsku a Švédsku. a vyrobeném ve spotřebě Finsko a Švédsko sdělí Komisi do 31. prosince 2001 opatření přijatá s cílem přizpůsobit se režimu Společenství. Na zprávu základě Komise o pokroku, který dotyčné členské státy udělaly. “ předloží Radě tomto Toto nařízení vstupuje v platnost dnem 1. ledna 2000. Článek 2 Toto nařízení je závazné v celém rozsahu a přímo použitelné ve všech členských státech. V Bruselu dne 14. prosince 1999. Za Radu předseda K. HEMILÄ (1) Úř. věst. C 342, 30. 11. 1999, s. 35. (2) Stanovisko dne v Úředním věstníku). ze 2. prosince 1999 (3) Úř. věst. L 351, 23. 12. 1997, s. 12. (dosud nezveřejněné


title: 1999/881/EC: Council Decision of 14 December 1999 amending Commission Decision 97/534/EC on the prohibition of the use of material presenting risks as regards transmissible spongiform encephalopathies

eurovoc_concepts:
animal disease
health risk
import restriction
offal
public health
veterinary legislation

text: L 331/78 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 12. 1999 COUNCIL DECISION of 14 December 1999 amending Commission Decision 97/534/EC on the prohibition of the use of material presenting risks as regards transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (1999/881/EC) THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 89/662/EEC of 11 December 1989 concerning veterinary checks in intra- Community trade with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), and in particular Article 9(4) thereof, Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market (2), and in particular Article 10(4) thereof, Having regard to Council Directive 97/78/EC of 18 December 1997 laying down the principles governing the organisation of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries (3), and in particular Article 22 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Whereas: (1) (2) The Commission adopted on 30 July 1997 Decision 97/534/EC on the prohibition of the use of material presenting risks as regards transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (4). Decision 97/534/EC is to apply from 31 December 1999; However, more time is needed to review the implica- tions of that Decision for a wide range of products and to reivew new scientific advice. The date from which Decision 97/534/EC is to apply should therefore be deferred; (3) The Standing Veterinary Committee has not given a favourable opinion, HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: Article 1 In Article 10 of Decision 97/534/EC, ‘31 December 1999’ shall be replaced by ‘30 June 2000’. Article 2 This Decision shall apply from 31 December 1999. Article 3 This Decision is addressed to the Member States. Done at Brussels, 14 December 1999. For the Council The President K. HEMILÄ (1) OJ L 395, 30. 12. 1989, p. 13. Directive as last amended by Direc- tive 92/118/EEC (OJ L 62, 15. 3. 1993, p. 49). (2) OJ L 224, 18. 8. 1990, p. 29. Directive as last amended by Directive 92/118/EEC (OJ L 62, 15. 3. 1993, p. 49). (3) OJ L 24, 30. 1. 1998, p. 9. (4) OJ L 216, 8. 8. 1997, p. 95. Decision as last amended by Council Decision 98/745/EC (OJ L 358, 31. 12. 1998, p. 113)