Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Ch I Prohibition - Coggle Diagram

- - - - unless exempt
        
        s. 9
        
        (i) efficiency benefits
        
        improving production/distribution
        
        promoting technical/economic progress
        
        (ii) must provide fair share of benefits to the consumers
        
        (iii) restrictions on competition must be NO MORE then the MINIMUM necessary to achieve benefits
        
        (iv) does not eliminate competition on substantial part or market
        
        block exemption (VABEO)
    - - undertaking
        
        engaged in economic activity
        
        Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Achilles Information Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 323, para 44
        
        complying with regulations did not make it outside scope of economic activity
        
        functional approach
        
        UKRS Training v NSAR
        
        single economic entity
        
        Hydrocortisone
        
        when a parent company can exercise decisive force over subsidiary = single unit
      - economic activity
        
        offering g/s on the market
        
        UKRS Training v NSAR
        
        non-economic activity
        
        core function of the state
        
        UKRS Training v NSAR
        
        ex. air navigation, anti pollution control
        
        Fenin v Comm
        
        public body purchases g/s for public health on basis of solidarity then = no undertaking
        
        BUT here they charged for services so = undertaking
        
        TEST=
        
        whether power exercised by body derives directly from legislation or exercising on behalf of state, and whether any charges/levies are determined not by itself but by a public authority
      - concerted practices
        
        OFT 401 para 2.5
        
        form of coordination that knowingly substitutes practical cooperation between undertakings for competition risks
        
        OFT 401 para 2.11 - 1.13
        
        Emergency Services
        
        reciprocal contracts which remove/reduce uncertainty about future conduct
        
        Makers v OFT[2007] CAT 11
        
        disclosure of pricing information by an undertaking operating at the retail level of the market to an undertaking operating at the supplier level of the market, followed by the subsequent disclosure of that information by that supplier to a different retailer.
        
        not the same as (triangular relationship) as in Argos v Littlewoods
        
        but this was disclosure of pricing info from one competitor to another
        
        1 more item...
        
        indirect contact with competitors
        
        concerted practice if:
        
        Tesco v OFT
        
        1) retailer A discloses future price intentions to supplier B
      - agreement
        
        concurrence of wills
        
        parties have expressed their joint intention
        
        OFT 401 para 2.7
        
        written
        
        spoken
        
        inferred
        
        continuing course of business dealings
- - - - 1) Toys and Games
        
        Hasbros, Argos, Littlewoods
        
        agreement fixing price of Hasbros toys/games
      - 2) Football Shirts
        
        price fixing
        
        Football Association, Manchester United, Umbro Holdings (including JBB)
        
        Umbro = manufacterer
        
        selective supplier (only sold to authentic sports brands ex. not to supermarkets)
        
        published recommended resale prices
        
        JBB = largest sports retailer in UK