Commercial - 1996

The case shown here are derived from the lawindexpro case law database. lawindexpro is a low cost case law database, with over 260,000 case listings, and over 200,000 links to full text judgments. The free service below shows the core information on the case, but is restricted in several ways. A small proportion of cases do allow access to the full lawindexpro information. These cases are selected at random, and may be different on your next visit. The active links through to lawindexpro are extremely powerful allowing full access to all linked cases.  

This page lists 7 cases, and was prepared on 28 October 2012.

MD Foods -v- Baines and others [1996] ICR 183
1996 CA Stuart-Smith, Hirst and Schiemann L.JJ	Commercial	Casemap 1 Citers
	The parties agreed to buy and sell milk but not to each others customers. The agreement was a restricve trade parctice and was void for not having been registered.

Aberdeen Solicitor's Property Centre Ltd and Another -v- Director General of Fair Trading
20 Feb 1996 RPC	Commercial, Legal Professions
	A restrictive practice on advertising imposed by the Law Society of Scotland related to legal practice and so was exempt from registration.
	Restrictive Trade Practices Act 1976 26

Stagecoach Holdings Plc -v- Secretary of State for Trade and Industry
29 Oct 1996 OHCS	Commercial
	No presumption as to size of area for investigation by Monopolies Commission.
	Fair Trading Act 1973 64

Tetra Pak -v- Commission C-333/94; [1997] 4 CMLR 662; [1996] EUECJ C-333/94P
14 Nov 1996 ECJ	European, Commercial	Casemap 1 Citers
	When defining the relevant market for the purpose of applying Article 86 of the Treaty, the competitive conditions and the structure of supply and demand on the market are relevant criteria for determining whether certain products are interchangeable with others. Application of Article 86 presupposes a link between the dominant position and the alleged abusive conduct, which is normally not present where conduct on a market distinct from the dominated market produces effects on that distinct market. In the case of distinct, but associated, markets, application of Article 86 to conduct found on the associated, non-dominated, market and having effects on that associated market can only be justified by special circumstances. An undertaking which enjoys a quasi-monopoly on certain markets and a leading position on distinct, though closely associated, markets is placed in a situation comparable to that of holding a dominant position on those markets as a whole. Conduct by such an undertaking on those distinct markets which is alleged to be abusive may therefore be covered by Article 86 of the Treaty without any need to show that it is dominant on them. The list of abusive practices set out in the second paragraph of Article 86 of the Treaty is not exhaustive. Consequently, even where tied sales of two products are in accordance with commercial usage or there is a natural link between the two products in question, such sales may still constitute abuse within the meaning of Article 86 unless they are objectively justified. When determining whether an undertaking has practised predatory pricing for the purposes of applying Article 86 of the Treaty, a distinction must be drawn between prices below average variable costs, which must always be considered abusive, and prices below average total costs but above average variable costs, which are only to be considered abusive if an intention to eliminate can be shown. It would not be appropriate to require in addition, in order to categorize its pricing as predatory, proof that the undertaking concerned had a realistic chance of recouping its losses. It must be possible to penalize predatory pricing whenever there is a risk that competitors will be eliminated.
	Link[s] omitted

Regina -v- Secretary of State for the Environment Ex Parte Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council
16 Dec 1996 QBD	Local Government, Commercial
	A term in a tender requiring an undertaking to incorporate certain terms was anti-competitive.
	Local Government Act 1988 32

Moccia Irme SpA -v- Commission of the European Communities (Rec 1996,p II-2261) T-164/96
17 Dec 1996 ECFI	European, Commercial
	Europa ECSC - State aid - Individual decision refusing to authorize the grant of State aid to a steel-making undertaking - Suspension of operation of a measure - Necessary interim measures - Interest in obtaining the interim measures sought - Application dismissed. A decision of the Commission refusing authorization for the grant of State aid to a steel undertaking is negative in character. Such an undertaking cannot establish an interest in obtaining the suspension of such a decision by way of interim relief since, in the absence of a positive decision of the Commission authorizing the aid in question, the prohibition on subsidies and aid laid down by Article 4(c) of the ECSC Treaty must apply. Nor can such an undertaking establish an interest in obtaining, by way of interim relief, the reopening of the procedure for examining the aid in question, inasmuch as to reopen the procedure would not necessarily lead the Commission to adopt a positive decision which alone could permit the State in question to grant the aid to that undertaking. Moreover, a measure of that kind would not be an interim measure since it would produce the same results as those sought in the main proceedings and prejudge the decision on the merits. Finally, where the aid in question is related to a system of aid, already approved by the Commission, for the permanent closure of steelworks, to uphold an application for interim relief seeking that the Commission be required to call upon the Member State concerned to suspend payment of aid for closure to the other undertakings which have applied for it is of only apparent usefulness, inasmuch as it does not prevent the expiry of the time-limit, laid down in Decision No 3855/91, beyond which no more aid can be paid. Moreover, such a measure - amounting to ordering a Member State to suspend an aid scheme already found to be compatible with the Treaty - would manifestly be beyond the powers conferred on the Commission.
	Link[s] omitted

Mats Arne Olof Wilander; Karel Novacek -v-; Brian Tobin and David Jude (the President and Honorary Treasurer Respectively of the International Tennis Federation) [1996] EWCA Civ 1280
20 Dec 1996 CA	Commercial	Casemap 1 Citers
	Link[s] omitted