OpenLegislation

Commission Decision of 30 November 2005 relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the Treaty establishing the European Community against Armando Álvarez SA, Bernay Film Plastique, Bischof + Klein France SAS, Bischof + Klein GmbH & Co. KG, Bonar Technical Fabrics NV, British Polythene Industries PLC, Cofira-Sac SA, Combipac BV, Fardem Packaging BV, FLSmidth & Co. A/S, FLS Plast A/S, Groupe Gascogne, JM Gesellschaft für industrielle Beteiligungen mbH & Co. KGaA, Kendrion NV, Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher CV, Low & Bonar PLC, Nordenia International AG, Nordfolien GmbH, Plásticos Españoles SA, RKW AG Rheinische Kunststoffwerke, Sachsa Verpackung GmbH, Stempher BV, Trioplast Industrier AB, Trioplast Wittenheim SA, UPM-Kymmene Oyj (Case COMP/38354 — Industrial bags) (notified under document number C(2005) 4634) (Only the French, English, Dutch, German and Spanish versions are authentic) (2007/686/EC) (revoked)

EU Decision 2007/686 · Adopted 30 October 2005 · Extends to United Kingdom

Original text. legislation.gov.uk does not revise this item, so later amendments are not shown here. Changes made to it are listed under each provision when known.

Commission Decision

of 30 November 2005

relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the Treaty establishing the European Community against Armando Álvarez SA, Bernay Film Plastique, Bischof + Klein France SAS, Bischof + Klein GmbH & Co. KG, Bonar Technical Fabrics NV, British Polythene Industries PLC, Cofira-Sac SA, Combipac BV, Fardem Packaging BV, FLSmidth & Co. A/S, FLS Plast A/S, Groupe Gascogne, JM Gesellschaft für industrielle Beteiligungen mbH & Co. KGaA, Kendrion NV, Koninklijke Verpakkingsindustrie Stempher CV, Low & Bonar PLC, Nordenia International AG, Nordfolien GmbH, Plásticos Españoles SA, RKW AG Rheinische Kunststoffwerke, Sachsa Verpackung GmbH, Stempher BV, Trioplast Industrier AB, Trioplast Wittenheim SA, UPM-Kymmene Oyj

(Case COMP/38354 — Industrial bags)

(notified under document number C(2005) 4634)

(Only the French, English, Dutch, German and Spanish versions are authentic)

(2007/686/EC) (revoked)

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

On 30 November 2005 the Commission adopted a decision relating to a proceeding under Article 81 of the EC Treaty. In accordance with the provisions of Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003, the Commission herewith publishes the names of the parties and the main content of the decision, including any penalties imposed, having regard to the legitimate interest of undertakings in the protection of their business secrets.

Annotations to the whole text

Textual amendments

F1

Decision revoked (31.12.2020) by The Competition (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (S.I. 2019/93), reg. 1(1), Sch. 3 para. 2 (as amended by S.I. 2020/1343, reg. 34(3)); 2020 c. 1, Sch. 5 para. 1(1)

Contents

  1. 1SUMMARY OF THE CASE Repealed
  2. 1.1Addressees Repealed
  3. (1)The decision is addressed to the following undertakings for having infringed Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty: Repealed
  4. (2)Division (2) Repealed
  5. 1.2The industrial bags sector Repealed
  6. (3)Division (3) Repealed
  7. (4)Plastic industrial bags can be divided into four categories: Repealed
  8. 1.3The supply Repealed
  9. (5)Division (5) Repealed
  10. 1.4The demand Repealed
  11. (6)Division (6) Repealed
  12. (7)Division (7) Repealed
  13. 1.5Scope of the infringement Repealed
  14. (8)Division (8) Repealed
  15. 1.6Origin and procedure Repealed
  16. (9)Division (9) Repealed
  17. 1.7Functioning of the cartel Repealed
  18. (10)The cartel operated basically at two levels: Repealed
  19. (11)The anticompetitive practices identified covered in particular: Repealed
  20. 2FINES Repealed
  21. 2.1Basic Amount Repealed
  22. (12)Division (12) Repealed
  23. 2.1.1Gravity Repealed
  24. (13)Division (13) Repealed
  25. 2.1.2Differential treatment Repealed
  26. (14)Division (14) Repealed
  27. (15)Division (15) Repealed
  28. (16)Division (16) Repealed
  29. (17)Division (17) Repealed
  30. 2.1.3Sufficient deterrence Repealed
  31. (18)Division (18) Repealed
  32. 2.1.4Duration Repealed
  33. (19)Division (19) Repealed
  34. 2.2Aggravating circumstances Repealed
  35. 2.2.1Repeated infringements Repealed
  36. (20)Division (20) Repealed
  37. 2.2.2Obstruction to the investigation Repealed
  38. (21)Division (21) Repealed
  39. 2.3Attenuating circumstances Repealed
  40. (22)Division (22) Repealed
  41. 2.4Application of the 10 % turnover limit Repealed
  42. (23)Division (23) Repealed
  43. (24)Division (24) Repealed
  44. 2.5Application of the 1996 Leniency Notice Repealed
  45. (25)Division (25) Repealed
  46. 2.5.1Section B (reduction from 75 % to 100 %) Repealed
  47. (26)Division (26) Repealed
  48. (27)Division (27) Repealed
  49. 2.5.2Section D (reduction from 10 % to 50 %) Repealed
  50. (28)Division (28) Repealed
  51. (29)Division (29) Repealed
  52. (30)Division (30) Repealed
  53. (31)Division (31) Repealed
  54. (32)Division (32) Repealed
  55. 3DECISION Repealed
  56. (33)The following undertakings have infringed Article 81 of the Treaty by participating, during the periods indicated, in a complex of agreements and concerted practices in the plastic industrial bags sector in Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, consisting in the fixing of prices and the establishment of common price calculation models, the sharing of markets and the allocation of sales quotas, the assignment of customers, deals and orders, the submission of concerted bids in response to certain invitations to tender and the exchange of individualised information: Repealed
  57. (34)Division (34) Repealed
  58. (35)For these infringements the following fines are imposed: Repealed
  59. (36)Division (36) Repealed
  60. (37)Division (37) Repealed

1SUMMARY OF THE CASEF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.1AddresseesF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(1)The decision is addressed to the following undertakings for having infringed Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty:F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(2)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.2The industrial bags sectorF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(3)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(4)Plastic industrial bags can be divided into four categories:F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3The supplyF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(5)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.4The demandF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(6)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(7)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.5Scope of the infringementF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(8)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.6Origin and procedureF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(9)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.7Functioning of the cartelF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(10)The cartel operated basically at two levels:F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(11)The anticompetitive practices identified covered in particular:F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2FINESF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.1Basic AmountF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(12)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.1.1GravityF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(13)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.1.2Differential treatmentF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(14)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(15)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(16)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(17)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.1.3Sufficient deterrenceF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(18)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.1.4DurationF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(19)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.2Aggravating circumstancesF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.2.1Repeated infringementsF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(20)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.2.2Obstruction to the investigationF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(21)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.3Attenuating circumstancesF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(22)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.4Application of the 10 % turnover limitF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(23)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(24)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.5Application of the 1996 Leniency NoticeF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(25)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.5.1Section B (reduction from 75 % to 100 %)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(26)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(27)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.5.2Section D (reduction from 10 % to 50 %)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(28)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(29)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(30)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(31)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(32)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3DECISIONF1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(33)The following undertakings have infringed Article 81 of the Treaty by participating, during the periods indicated, in a complex of agreements and concerted practices in the plastic industrial bags sector in Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, consisting in the fixing of prices and the establishment of common price calculation models, the sharing of markets and the allocation of sales quotas, the assignment of customers, deals and orders, the submission of concerted bids in response to certain invitations to tender and the exchange of individualised information:F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(34)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(35)For these infringements the following fines are imposed:F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(36)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(37)F1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .