Chapter 1
Chapter 1
This is especially the case if the parallel conduct is such as to enable those concerned to attempt to stabilize prices at a level different from that to which competition would have led, and to consolidate established positions to the detriment of effective freedom of movement of the products in the Common Market and of the freedom of consumers to choose their suppliers.
Nine. The function of price competition is to keep prices down to the lowest possible level, and to encourage the movement of goods between the Member States, thereby permitting the most efficient possible distribution of activities in the matter of productivity and the capacity of undertakings to adapt themselves to change.
Independent and non-uniform conduct by undertakings in the Common Market encourages the pursuit of one of the basic objectives of the Treaty, namely the interpenetration of national markets and, as a result, direct access by consumers to the sources of production of the whole Community.
Ten. Although every producer is free to change his prices, taking into account in so doing the present or foreseeable conduct of his competitors, nonetheless it is contrary to the rules on competition contained in the Treaty for a producer to cooperate with his competitors, in any way whatsoever, in order to determine a coordinated course of action relating to a change of
In Case forty-eight slash sixty-nine
IMPERIAL CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED, hereinafter referred to as 'ICI', having registered offices in London and Manchester, assisted and represented by C. R. C. Wijckerheld Bisdom and B. H. ter Kuile, Advocates at the Hoge Raad of the Netherlands, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of J. Loesch, Advocate, two rue Goethe,
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, represented by its Legal Advisers,
prices and to ensure its success by prior elimination of all uncertainty as to each other's conduct regarding the essential elements of that action, such as the amount, subject-matter, date, and place of such changes.
Eleven. Where an undertaking established in a third country, in the exercise of its power to control its subsidiaries established within the Community, orders them to carry out a decision to raise prices, the uniform implementation of which together with other undertakings constitutes a practice prohibited under Article eighty-five one of the EEC Treaty, the conduct of the subsidiaries must be imputed to the parent company.
For the purpose of applying the rules on competition, unity of conduct on the market as between a parent company and its subsidiaries overrides the formal separation between those companies resulting from their separate legal personality.
Twelve. The fact that no statement is included showing why the Community administration has jurisdiction does not stand in the way of a review of the legality of its measures.
The Community administration is not bound to include in its decisions all the arguments which it might later use in response to submissions of illegality which might be raised against its measures.
applicant,
J. Thiesing, G. Marchesini and J. Griesmar, acting as Agents, assisted by Professor W. Van Gerven, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of its Legal Adviser, É. Reuter, four boulevard Royal,
Application for the annulment of the Commission Decision of twenty-four July nineteen sixty-nine published in the Journal Officiel Number L one hundred ninety-five of seven August nineteen sixty-nine, page eleven et seq., relating to proceedings under Article eighty-five of the EEC Treaty,
THE COURT
THE COURT
composed of: R. Lecourt, President, J. Mertens de Wilmars and H. Kutscher, Presidents of Chambers, A. M. Donner, A. Trabucchi, R. Monaco and P. Pescatore, Judges,
Advocate-General: H. Mayras Registrar: A. Van Houtte gives the following