EUR-Lex - 31976D0159 - EN

THESE OBLIGATIONS AMOUNT TO A RESTRICTION OF COMPETITION WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) . FOR THESE MEANS OF SELECTION , WHICH GO BEYOND TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS , IMPEDE TO AN APPRECIABLE EXTENT THE APPOINTMENT OF UNDERTAKINGS AS SABA DEALERS , AND THUS RESTRICT ACCESS TO THE TRADE IN SABA PRODUCTS .

30 . COMPLIANCE BY SABA DEALERS WITH THE ABOVE OBLIGATIONS CAN BE VERIFIED THROUGH THE ENQUIRIES THEY ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE , BEFORE SUPPLYING A RETAILER , AS TO WHETHER HE HAS ACTUALLY BEEN APPOINTED A SABA DEALER , BY CONSULTING THE EEC DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT AND THE LIST OF SABA DEALERS ( SEE PARAGRAPH 11 ( B ) ABOVE ) . THIS RESULT IS ALSO ACHIEVED THROUGH THE OBLIGATION ON SABA DEALERS TO KEEP A REGISTER OF SERIAL NUMBERS ( SEE PARAGRAPH 11 ( C ) ) . SABA THEREBY RETAINS THE MEANS WHERE A NON-APPOINTED DEALER OBTAINS SUPPLIES , TO DISCOVER WHICH SABA DEALER MADE THE DELIVERY .

31 . THE OBLIGATIONS IMPOSED ON SABA DEALERS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPHS 29 AND 30 IN THEIR OBJECT AND EFFECT RESTRICT AND DISTORT COMPETITION WITHIN THE COMMON MARKET . THEY PREVENT SABA AND ITS DEALERS FROM SUPPLYING DEALERS WHO ARE NOT PART OF THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM . THEY FURTHER RESTRICT THE FREEDOM OF CHOICE BOTH OF DEALERS CAPABLE OF MARKETING ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FOR DOMESTIC LEISURE PURPOSES BUT NOT APPOINTED BY SABA , AND OF CONSUMERS . THEY MAY ALSO AFFECT TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES , SINCE NO DEALER OUTSIDE SABA'S SYSTEM MAY ACQUIRE SABA EQUIPMENT FOR EXPORT TO OTHER MEMBER STATES .

32 . IN THE STANDARD SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT , SABA UNDERTAKES TO SELL ITS PRODUCTS FOR RESALE WITHIN A GIVEN AREA OF THE COMMON MARKET ONLY TO THE SOLE DISTRIBUTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT TERRITORY ( SEE PARAGRAPH 13 ABOVE ) . SABA SOLE DISTRIBUTORS ARE OBLIGED NOT TO MANUFACTURE OR SELL COMPETING PRODUCTS ( PROHIBITION ON DEALING IN COMPETING PRODUCTS ) NOR TO ADVERTISE OR SET UP BRANCHES OR DISTRIBUTION CENTRES OUTSIDE THEIR OWN TERRITORY ( PROHIBITION ON CANVASSING CUSTOMERS ) ( SEE PARAGRAPH 13 ( A ) AND ( B ) . THESE OBLIGATIONS ARE RESTRICTIONS OF COMPETITION WITHIN THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) , AND MAY AFFECT TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES .

B . PROVISIONS WHICH ARE NOT PROHIBITED BY ARTICLE 85 ( 1 )

33 . THE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN SABA AND ITS WHOLESALERS , SOLE DISTRIBUTORS AND SPECIALIST RETAILERS CONTAIN FURTHER PROVISIONS WHICH ARE NOT PROHIBITED BY ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) , AND OBLIGATIONS WHICH , AT LEAST IF APPLIED REASONABLY , WOULD NOT HAVE RESTRICTIVE EFFECTS WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) .

34 . THE PROHIBITION IMPOSED ON SABA WHOLESALERS IN GERMANY , PREVENTING THEM FROM SUPPLYING GOODS COVERED BY THE AGREEMENT TO PRIVATE CUSTOMERS IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC AND WEST BERLIN IS NEITHER IN ITS OBJECT NOR IN ITS EFFECT A RESTRICTION OF COMPETITION WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) . THIS PROHIBITION ADMITTEDLY PREVENTS SABA WHOLESALERS FROM COMPETING WITH SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS IN GERMANY AND SABA DEALERS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES OF THE COMMUNITY . THE SUPPLY OF GOODS BY SABA WHOLESALERS TO PRIVATE CUSTOMERS IN GERMANY WOULD HOWEVER BE INAPPROPRIATE IN A MULTI-LEVEL SYSTEM SUCH AS THAT OPERATED BY SABA , WITH ITS CLEAR DEFINITION OF FUNCTION BETWEEN WHOLESALERS AND RETAILERS . SABA WHOLESALERS WOULD FURTHERMORE HAVE AN UNFAIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OVER SABA RETAILERS . THIS TYPE OF UNFAIR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE WOULD NOT BE PROTECTED BY ARTICLE 85 .

35 . THE ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION ( UP TO 1 JULY 1977 ) ON SABA DEALERS EXPORTING SABA PRODUCTS FROM THE EEC OR REIMPORTING THEM ( SEE PARAGRAPH 11 ( D ) ) IS NOT AN APPRECIABLE RESTRAINT OF COMPETITION AFFECTING TRADE BETWEEN MEMBER STATES . THE DOUBLE CUSTOMS DUTIES INVOLVED IN CROSSING THE COMMUNITY FRONTIER TWICE DISCOURAGE SABA DEALERS AND CONSUMERS IN THE COMMUNITY FROM OBTAINING FROM A NON-MEMBER COUNTRY GOODS EXPORTED THERE BY SABA OR BY A SABA DEALER , AS SABA DOES NOT OFFER PURCHASERS IN NON-MEMBER COUNTRIES PRICES MORE FAVOURABLE THAN THOSE IN THE EEC .

36 . THE CONDITIONS OF SALE FOR THE DOMESTIC MARKET ( EDITION OF MAY 1972 ) ( SEE PARAGRAPH 8 ) CONTAIN NO OBLIGATIONS DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY RESTRICTING COMPETITION WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) OF THE EEC TREATY . ACCORDINGLY , THE COMMISSION CAN TO THIS EXTENT GRANT NEGATIVE CLEARANCE UNDER ARTICLE 2 OF REGULATION N 17 .

37 . THE OBLIGATION ON SOLE DISTRIBUTORS TO INFORM SABA UPON REQUEST OF THEIR GROSS INCOME AND OF DISCOUNTS GRANTED TO THEIR CUSTOMERS AND TO SUPPLY ANY INFORMATION REQUIRED BY SABA'S REPRESENTATIVES ( SEE PARAGRAPH 13 ( G ) AND ( H ) ) IS NOT TO BE REGARDED AS RESTRICTIVE OF COMPETITION SIMPLY BECAUSE IT ENABLES SABA TO FIND OUT HOW ITS SOLE DISTRIBUTORS ARE COMPETING WITH EACH OTHER . AS LONG AS SABA REFRAINS FROM RECOMMENDING THEM NOT TO SELL PRODUCTS OUTSIDE THEIR OWN AREA OR TO APPLY PARTICULAR PRICES , AND DOES NOT OFFER ADVANTAGES OR THREATEN DISADVANTAGES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THESE ENDS , THE PROVISION OF SUCH INFORMATION CANNOT BE REGARDED AS A MEANS OF RESTRICTING COMPETITION . THE COMMISSION HAS NO EVIDENCE AT PRESENT THAT SABA HAS BEEN APPLYING THESE CLAUSES FOR SUCH PURPOSES .

III . APPLICABILITY OF ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) OF THE EEC TREATY

PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) , THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) MAY BE DECLARED INAPPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF AGREEMENTS BETWEEN UNDERTAKINGS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO IMPROVING THE PRODUCTION OR DISTRIBUTION OF GOODS OR TO PROMOTING TECHNICAL OR ECONOMIC PROGRESS , WHILE ALLOWING CONSUMERS A FAIR SHARE OF THE RESULTING BENEFIT , AND WHICH DO NOT :

( A ) IMPOSE ON THE UNDERTAKINGS CONCERNED RESTRICTIONS WHICH ARE NOT INDISPENSABLE TO THE ATTAINMENT OF THESE OBJECTIVES :

( B ) AFFORD SUCH UNDERTAKINGS THE POSSIBILITY OF ELIMINATING COMPETITION IN RESPECT OF A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE PRODUCTS IN QUESTION .

38 . ACCESS TO THE SABA DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM IS RESTRICTED TO THOSE DEALERS WHO FULFIL CERTAIN OBJECTIVE CRITERIA AND WHO PARTICULARLY DEVOTE THEMSELVES TO THE DISTRIBUTION OF PRODUCTS COVERED BY THE AGREEMENTS .

39 . BY THESE MEANS IT CAN BE ENSURED THAT FOR THE SALE OF SABA PRODUCTS THERE ARE AVAILABLE DEALERS POSSESSING THE NECESSARY TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE SALE OF TECHNICALLY COMPLEX ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FOR LEISURE PURPOSES ( I.E . CAPABLE OF PROVIDING QUALIFIED SERVICE AND ADVICE AND OF INSTALLING THE EQUIPMENT CORRECTLY ) AND FOR PROVIDING THE NECESSARY AFTER-SALES SERVICE .

40 . THE FACT THAT SABA DEALERS MUST PARTICULARLY DEVOTE THEMSELVES TO THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PRODUCTS COVERED BY THE AGREEMENTS RESULT IN IMPROVEMENTS IN THE FOLLOWING RESPECTS :

THE OBLIGATION ON SABA WHOLESALERS TO CONCLUDE SIX-MONTHLY ADVANCE SUPPLY AGREEMENTS AND TO TAKE DELIVERY WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD OF THE QUANTITIES OF GOODS ORDERED ENABLES SABA TO PLAN ITS PRODUCTION AND SALES IN DETAIL AND TO ENSURE CONTINUITY OF SUPPLIES AND RATIONALIZE MANUFACTURE AND MARKETING . AS A CORRESPONDING OBLIGATION EXISTS FOR SABA SOLE DISTRIBUTORS , SABA IS ABLE TO TAKE ACCOUNT OF THEIR REQUIREMENTS IN ITS PLANNING . WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THIS COOPERATION SABA IS ITSELF OBLIGED TO OFFER A COMPETITIVE RANGE OF GOODS AT REASONABLE PRICES TO ITS WHOLESALERS AND SOLE DISTRIBUTORS . THIS REQUIRES A CLOSE AND CONTINUAL EXCHANGE OF VIEWS WITH WHOLESALERS , IN PARTICULAR AS TO THE FUTURE STRUCTURE AND PRODUCT MIX OF THE SABA PRODUCTION SCHEDULES . THUS THE SABA WHOLESALERS AND EXCLUSIVE DISTRIBUTORS ARE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN PRODUCTION PLANNING , FOR WHICH , BECAUSE OF THEIR PROXIMITY TO THE MARKET , THEY ARE PARTICULARLY SUITED . IN THIS WAY IT IS ENSURED THAT SABA WHOLESALERS AND SOLE DISTRIBUTORS ARE SUPPLIED WITH EQUIPMENT SUITABLE FOR THE MARKET AND APPROPRIATE TO THE PARTICULAR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONSUMERS .

THE OBLIGATION ON SABA WHOLESALERS AND SPECIALIST RETAILERS TO ACHIEVE AN ADEQUATE TURNOVER IN THE PRODUCTS , AND THE OBLIGATION ON SABA WHOLESALERS TO AGREE A DELIVERY QUOTA REASONABLY APPROPRIATE TO THE PREDICTABLE GROWTH IN THE DOMESTIC MARKET FOR ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FOR LEISURE PURPOSES , CONTRIBUTE TO A RATIONALIZATION OF DISTRIBUTION , A MORE INTENSIVE EXPLOITATION OF THE MARKET AND THE PROMOTION OF SALES . THE OBLIGATION ARISING FROM THE SUPPLY AGREEMENT FOR SABA WHOLESALERS TO STOCK SABA PRODUCTS , AS WELL AS THE OBLIGATION UNDERTAKEN BY SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS TO MARKET AS FULL A RANGE AS POSSIBLE OF SABA PRODUCTS AND TO KEEP A CORRESPONDING STOCK , RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN WHOLESALERS LOCALLY AVAILABLE STOCKS AND THUS IN WIDER COVERAGE OF THE SABA RANGE AND IN AN IMPROVEMENT IN THE LEVEL OF STOCKS HELD BY SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS .

41 . FINALLY , IT CAN BE ACCEPTED THAT THE AGREEMENTS CONCLUDED BETWEEN SABA AND ITS SOLE DISTRIBUTORS HELP TO IMPROVE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE RELEVANT PRODUCTS , AS IS GENERALLY THE CASE WITH EXCLUSIVE DEALING AGREEMENTS IN INTERSTATE TRADE , FOR THE REASONS GIVEN IN THE PREAMBLE TO COMMISSION REGULATION N 67/67/EEC .

42 . THE CONSUMER BENEFITS DIRECTLY FROM THE ADVANTAGES DERIVED FROM IMPROVED CUSTOMER SERVICE , CONTINUITY OF SUPPLIES , ADAPTATION OF SABA EQUIPMENT TO THE PARTICULAR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS OF CONSUMERS , INCREASE OF STOCKS HELD BY LOCAL WHOLESALERS AND THE BROADER RANGE OF GOODS OFFERED BY RETAILERS .

43 . WITH RESPECT TO THE BENEFITS RESULTING FROM SABA'S RATIONALIZATION OF PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION , IT CAN BE ASSUMED THAT THE KEEN COMPETITION IN THE MARKET FOR ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FOR LEISURE PURPOSES WILL OBLIGE SABA TO PASS ON THESE BENEFITS TO THE CONSUMER , ESPECIALLY AS GERMAN SABA WHOLESALERS AND SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS IN ALL THE EEC COUNTRIES ARE ALSO PERMITTED TO SELL COMPETING PRODUCTS .

FURTHERMORE , THERE IS SUFFICIENT PRESSURE AS A RESULT OF THE COMPETITION AT EACH SUCCESSIVE STAGE OF DISTRIBUTION TO OBLIGE SABA WHOLESALERS , SOLE DISTRIBUTORS AND SPECIALIST RETAILERS TO PASS ON TO THE CONSUMER THE BENEFITS OF RATIONALIZATION , BOTH THOSE MENTIONED ABOVE AND THOSE RESULTING AT THEIR OWN STAGE OF DISTRIBUTION . FOR SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS AND CONSUMERS CAN BUY SABA PRODUCTS FROM ANY SABA DEALER IN THE EEC . IT IS ONLY IN THE SUPPLY OF THE PRIVATE CONSUMER IN GERMANY THAT GERMAN WHOLESALERS ARE NOT IN COMPETITION WITH OTHER SABA DEALERS . ELSEWHERE , SUCH COMPETITION IS ENSURED BY THE FACT THAT ALL SABA DEALERS ARE FREE TO SET PRICES AT THEIR OWN DISCRETION .

44 . THE SABA DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM CONTAINS NO PROVISION RESTRICTING COMPETITION WHICH IS NOT INDISPENSABLE TO THE ATTAINMENT OF THE BENEFITS MENTIONED ABOVE ( SEE PARAGRAPHS 39 TO 41 ) .

45 . THE RULES GOVERNING SABA'S SELECTIVE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FALL UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) OF THE EEC TREATY IN THAT THEY DENY SUPPLIES OF SABA EQUIPMENT NOT ONLY TO UNSUITABLE DEALERS BUT ALSO TO DEALERS WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO SELL THE SAME BUT WHO DO NOT UNDERTAKE OBLIGATIONS BEYOND THOSE OF A PURELY TECHNICAL NATURE ( SEE PARAGRAPH 29 ) . WITHOUT THESE OBLIGATIONS THE IMPROVEMENTS AND OBJECTIVES DISCUSSED ABOVE ( PARAGRAPH 40 ) COULD NOT BE ATTAINED .

46 . SABA'S OBLIGATION UNDER THE STANDARD SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT TO SUPPLY ITS PRODUCTS FOR RESALE WITHIN A GIVEN AREA OF THE COMMON MARKET ONLY TO THE SOLE DISTRIBUTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT AREA COMES WITHIN THE TERMS OF ARTICLE 1 ( 1 ) ( A ) OF COMMISSION REGULATION N 67/67/EEC AND MAY THEREFORE BE REGARDED AS AN INDISPENSABLE RESTRICTION , WHILE THE SOLE DISTRIBUTOR'S OBLIGATION NOT TO MANUFACTURE OR MARKET COMPETING PRODUCTS , AND NOT TO ADVERTISE FOR CUSTOMERS OR SET UP BRANCHES OR DISTRIBUTION CENTRES IN OTHER EEC COUNTRIES , ARE RESTRICTIONS OF COMPETITION OF A TYPE EXPRESSLY PERMITTED BY ARTICLE 2 ( 1 ) OF COMMISSION REGULATION N 67/67/EEC AND THEREFORE DO NOT PRECLUDE THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) OF THE EEC TREATY .

47 . THE AGREEMENTS CONSTITUTING THE SABA DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DO NOT AFFORD THE UNDERTAKINGS CONCERNED THE POSSIBILITY OF ELIMINATING COMPETITION IN RESPECT OF A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE PRODUCTS IN QUESTION .

48 . WITHIN THE COMMON MARKET THERE ARE MANY FIRMS MANUFACTURING TELEVISION , RADIO AND TAPERECORDING EQUIPMENT WHICH CAN COMPETE EFFECTIVELY WITH SABA , SINCE SABA'S MARKET SHARE IN THE EEC COUNTRIES IS RELATIVELY SMALL .

49 . EVEN IN THE MARKET FOR SABA PRODUCTS IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY , MANY SABA WHOLESALERS CAN COMPETE NOT ONLY WITH EACH OTHER , BUT ALSO WITH SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS IN ALL THE EEC COUNTRIES .

IN THE OTHER MEMBER STATES , WHERE SABA PRODUCTS ARE HANDLED BY SABA SOLE DISTRIBUTORS , SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS , DESPITE THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT GIVEN TO THE SOLE DISTRIBUTORS , CAN ALSO OBTAIN SABA PRODUCTS FROM OTHER SOLE DISTRIBUTORS AND FROM GERMAN WHOLESALERS , AS WELL AS FROM THE SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS OF THEIR CHOICE , WHILE , DESPITE THE PROHIBITION ON ADVERTISING BY SOLE DISTRIBUTORS , THE LATTER CAN ALSO SUPPLY SABA DEALERS IN OTHER EEC COUNTRIES .

AT THE RETAIL LEVEL THERE ARE MANY SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS IN BUSINESS IN THE EEC ( SOME 8 500 IN THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY ALONE ) , WHO ALL COMPETE AGAINST EACH OTHER , SINCE THEY CAN SUPPLY AS MANY CONSUMERS OR OTHER SABA DEALERS AS THEY WISH .

50 . ACCORDINGLY , THE AGREEMENTS CONSTITUTING THE SABA DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM , NAMELY :

1 . AGREEMENT FOR SABA WHOLESALERS IN THE EEC ,

2 . STANDARD SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT ,

3 . DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR SABA WHOLESALERS ,

4 . COOPERATION AGREEMENT ,

5 . AGREEMENT FOR SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS IN THE EEC ,

6 . DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS .

MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR EXEMPTION UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) OF THE EEC TREATY .

IV . APPLICATION OF ARTICLES 6 AND 8 OF REGULATION N 17

51 . THE LAST IMPORTANT AMENDMENTS TO THE AGREEMENTS GOVERNING THE DISTRIBUTION OF SABA PRODUCTS IN THE EEC WHICH WERE REQUIRED IN ORDER FOR THESE AGREEMENTS TO BE EXEMPTED WERE MADE BY SABA ON 22 JULY 1974 . THE DECISION UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) OF THE EEC TREATY SHOULD THEREFORE , IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6 OF REGULATION N 17 , HAVE EFFECT FROM 22 JULY 1974 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTION :

THE LAST AMENDMENT TO THE DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT FOR SABA WHOLESALERS WHICH WAS REQUIRED FOR THE EXEMPTION OF THIS AGREEMENT WAS MADE BY SABA ON 20 FEBRUARY 1975 . WITH RESPECT TO THE AGREEMENT , THE DECISION UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) OF THE EEC TREATY MAY THEREFORE TAKE EFFECT , PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 6 OF REGULATION N 17 , ONLY FROM THAT DATE .

52 . BECAUSE OF THE SPECIAL FEATURES OF THIS CASE , THE DURATION OF THIS DECISION SHOULD BE FIXED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 8 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION N 17 AT SIX YEARS , SO THAT THE COMMISSION MAY RE-EXAMINE THE EFFECTS OF THE SABA DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM WITHIN A RELATIVELY SHORT PERIOD .

53 . OBLIGATIONS SHOULD BE ATTACHED TO THE DECISION , SO THAT THE COMMISSION MAY BE IN A POSITION TO EXAMINE WHETHER ACCESS TO THE TRADE IN ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT FOR DOMESTIC LEISURE PURPOSES IS BEING IMPEDED UNJUSTIFIABLY BY THE SABA DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AND WHETHER SABA IS RESTRICTING COMPETITION TO AN EXTENT GREATER THAN THAT ARISING FROM THE TERMS OF THE DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENTS , SUCH AS BY INFLUENCING THE FIXING OF RETAIL PRICES . YEARLY REPORTS ARE THEREFORE TO BE SUPPLIED BY SABA TO THE COMMISSION FROM THE DATE OF THE DECISION , SETTING OUT ANY CASES WHERE DEALERS ARE REFUSED APPOINTMENT AS A SABA DEALER OR WHERE SUCH APPOINTMENT IS WITHDRAWN , WHERE AGREEMENTS FOR SUPPLY ARE REFUSED OR SUPPLIES WITHHELD , OR WHERE SABA HAS REQUESTED INSPECTION OF A SABA DEALER'S REGISTER OF SERIAL NUMBERS . THE LEGAL BASIS FOR THESE OBLIGATIONS IS ARTICLE 8 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION N 17 .

V . APPLICABILITY OF ARTICLE 7 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION N 17

54 . THE STANDARD SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT CONCLUDED WITH ETS FR . DRION ON 18 AND 24 NOVEMBER 1966 , REPLACING THE SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT NOTIFIED BY DRION ON 28 JANUARY 1963 AND ESSENTIALLY IN THE SAME TERMS , SATISFIED THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 7 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION N 17 . NEVERTHELESS IT WOULD BE UNJUSTIFIABLE TO GIVE EXEMPTION FROM THE PROHIBITION IN ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) FOR ANY SPECIFIED PERIOD BEFORE 16 DECEMBER 1972 . EVEN AFTER THE COMMISSION HAD POINTED OUT IN ITS STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS DATED 10 MARCH 1971 ; THAT :

_ THE OBLIGATION IMPOSED ON THE BELGIAN SOLE DISTRIBUTOR

TO OBTAIN THE APPROVAL OF SABA BEFORE SUPPLYING GERMAN RETAILERS AND TO SELL SABA PRODUCTS TO SUCH RETAILERS ONLY AT THE PRICES FIXED BY SABA , AND

TO REQUIRE ITS CUSTOMERS , WHEN SELLING PRODUCTS TO THE CONSUMER IN GERMANY , TO OBSERVE THE PRICE FIXED THERE BY SABA AND , WHEN SUPPLYING GERMAN RETAILERS , TO OBTAIN PRIOR APPROVAL FROM SABA ; AND

_ THE SPECIALIST TRADING AGREEMENTS , WHICH PREVENTED CERTAIN TYPES OF RETAILER FROM OBTAINING SUPPLIES ,

WERE PROHIBITED BY ARTICLE 85 ( 1 ) AND THAT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR EXEMPTION UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) WERE NOT SATISFIED , THE UNDERTAKINGS IN QUESTION NEVERTHELESS MAINTAINED THE RESTRAINTS ON COMPETITION UNTIL 15 DECEMBER 1972 .

55 . THE OTHER AGREEMENTS UNDER THE SABA DISTRIBUTION ARRANGEMENTS DO NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 7 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION N 17 , IN THAT :

_ THE AGREEMENT FOR SABA WHOLESALERS IN THE EEC ( 1972 EDITION ) ,

_ THE STANDARD SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENT ( 1966/67 VERSION ) AND

_ THE DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT ( 1965 EDITION ) ,

_ THE MODEL COOPERATION AGREEMENT ( EDITION OF 2 JANUARY 1974 ) ,

_ THE AGREEMENT FOR SABA SPECIALIST RETAILERS IN THE EEC ( 1972 EDITION )

AND

_ THE CONDITIONS OF SALE FOR THE DOMESTIC MARKET ( EDITION OF MAY 1962 )

BECOME APPLICABLE ONLY AFTER REGULATION N 17 ENTERED INTO FORCE , WHILE THE STANDARD SOLE DISTRIBUTORSHIP AGREEMENTS CONCLUDED WITH

_ A . LOSCHETTER ET FILS AND

_ SABA NEDERLAND NV

WERE NOTIFIED ONLY AFTER EXPIRY OF THE TIME LIMIT SET BY ARTICLE 5 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION N 17 ,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION :