10 20. Where a vertical agreement does not meet the criteria for the category exemption, there is no presumption of illegality under section 81. Companies are invited to conduct their own assessment without including the Commission or NCAs (vertical guidelines, points 3 and 62). 14 If the Commission or an ANCA later considers a vertical agreement (for example. B in the case of third-party complaints or disputes before national courts concerning the applicability of a vertical restriction), the Commission`s or NCA`s Office is the burden of proof that the agreement falls under Article 81, paragraph 1. Where Section 81, paragraph 1, is applicable, the parties may justify efficiency and benefit requirements, in which case the Commission or the AIF must verify whether the criteria set out in Article 81, paragraph 3, are met. 21. In the event of a dispute over a vertical agreement, the national court must check whether it falls under Article 81, paragraph 1, and, if so, whether it falls within the category exemption. If it is not eligible for a category exemption, the Tribunal must verify whether it meets the criteria set out in Section 81, paragraph 3. Under the Council`s Regulation (EC) No. 1/2003 regime, national courts can decide directly whether the criteria are met.
To determine the likely negative effects and potential benefits of the Commission, vertical restrictions are divided into four groups in the Commission`s vertical guidelines (figures): (1) Single Group of Trademarks: where the buyer merely places all or most of his orders with a particular supplier. This type of vertical restriction is found, for example, in various forms of supply agreements that > impose non-competition obligations on the buyer and prevent the buyer from reselling competing products; > have similar effects to a non-competition obligation, for example. B requirements that require the buyer to purchase all or most of the supplier`s requirements from the supplier; > have the effect of imposing quantities, forcing the buyer to take certain quantities or inciting (para. For example, retrospective discounts, discounts or superiorities) when certain revenue targets are met; or > binding obligations in the form of a quantitative limitation for the buyer with respect to the linked product. 14 If a case nevertheless creates genuine uncertainty in that it raises new or unresolved questions about the application of Articles 81 or 82, the parties may ask the Commission for informal guidance. In 2004, the Commission issued an opinion setting out the framework in which it will assess whether such a guidance letter should be published. The Commission publishes non-confrontational versions of these guidelines on its website. 8 and can the European Commission verify the effectiveness and relevance of EU competition rules for supply agreements, i.e.
the Vertical Category Exemption Regulation (VBER) (and the associated vertical guidelines). The European Commission has just published a report which states that the current rules on legal and corporate security are important, but that they are not in contact with market realities, including the emergence of online platforms. As a result, “their relevance and effectiveness have gradually diminished.” 14 …/… (g) new products: for new products (or existing products sold for the first time in a new geographic market), it can be difficult to weaken markets and market shares.