COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

COM(90) 260 final

Brussels, 18 June 1990

COMMUNICATION BY THE COMMISSION

Report on the possibility of a group

exemption for consortia agreements in Liner shipping

Proposal for a

COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC)

on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty

to certain categories of agreements, decisions and

concerted practices between shipping companies

(presented by the Commission)

- 1 -

Report on the possibility of a group exemption

for consortia agreements in liner shipping

1 • IntrodtJc:tion

1.1. In December 1986, at the time of the adoption of Regulation no. 4056/86, the Commission undertook to submit within one year, a

report to the Council on whether to provide for block exemptions

for consortia, and to make proposals to that effect if ( 1 ) necessary

1 .2. As explained in the interim reports made to the Transport Working Group on 7 January< 2

> and 29 November 1988' 3 ', the Commission was

unable despite its repeated efforts to complete its work within one

year because the industry did not make available to it a sufficient

number of consortia agreements to constitute a satisfactory basis

for analysis. This was finally done in stages up to September 1909.

2. Background

2.1. The Commission is aware of present and prospective developments and

organisational changes in world shipping and the implications which

these may have for the Community's shipping and competition

policies.

<l > See Council Doc. No. 11584/86 MAR 8~ of 19 December 1986 Annex III

'2

' See doc. No. 4130/88 MAR 3 of 11.1.1988

( 3) See doc. No 10048/88 MAR 38 of 13.12.1988

. ., ,., L..'.

- 2 -

Competition in the liner shipping industry has created the need for

companies to be efficient in order to compete on the world market.

The shipping industry is a capital intensive one, with a high

proportion of fixed to variable costs. Ships therefore need to he

as fully utilised as possible if the capital costs are to be

covered. Individual enterprises acting alone without having strong

financial resources are in a vulnerable position if heavy

overcapacity shows itself on their particular trade routes.

The development of container services has increasen pressures for

co-operation and rationalisation, especially on the longer deep sea

trade routes. Because of the large amounts of cargo which can be

handled daily from a containership, operators have been ~ble to u~e

bigger ships without increasing, and indeed even reducir.g, port

time. However, since the amount of cargo available remains much the

same, fewer of the larger ships are needed to serve a particular

trade. Community shipowners have difficulty to operate with

container ships of the size needed to obtain the available

economies scale and thus minimise co~ts, whilst maintaining a

satisfactory frequency of service.

2.3. Other related pressures towards closer association between

operators on containerised trade routes were that:

the establishment of a container service necessitated an initial

capital investment greater than that required to replace tonnage

on conventional services. Individual lines therefore hesitated to

make this investmont on their own account;

- container ships were less free to transfer from one trade to

another because many were designed for a particular trade route;

in addition many ports did not have the equipment and

infrastructure to handle container ships <a problem which still

exists in some developing countries>

2.4. These pressures for cooperation led individual shipping lines to

enter into joint fleet operations usually described as ~onsortia.

- 3 -

3. Analysis of consortia agreements

3.1. The Comit~ des Associations d'Armateurs des Communaut~s Europ6ennes

<CAACE> has provided the Commission with a list of consortia

serving Europe showing the conference, the consortium and its

members and indicating the scope of clauses included. A copy of the

list is attDched ~s Annex I.

The Commission has also received copies of the 23 consortia

agreements listed in Annex II. The Commission has been asked to

treat the details of these agreements as confidential.

3.2. The examination of the agreements in the possession of the

Commission and of such information as has been given by CAACE ar1d

by others has permitted the following findings:

<i> There are approximately 57 consortia operating worldwide, at

least 40 of which operate in Community liner trades. The

number of consortia in particu]ar trade, their organisation

and membership, and the scope and terms of the consortia

agreements all vary.

<iil The variety and complexity of the different arr·angements 1s

considerable. Almost the only common factor is that they are

coalitions of several independent shipping lines seel:ing some

form of co-operation in order to maintain profitability

through rationalisation in the widest sense and to spre~d the

expense of investment in container operations. Each could, in

principle, be considered sui generis. However, a number of

specific arrangements seem to be common to most consortia.

- ~ -

<iii> Joint fleet operations

a> Joint schedule: 37 consortia

b> Space/slot exchange: 37

c> Equipment pool: 20 <in some cases optional or only amongst

some members of the consortium)

d> Joint operational office: 30

<iv> rerminals

al Joint terminal operation: 37 <in some cases only optional>

b> Joint terminal contracts: 37 <in some cases optional or

negotiated jointly but concluded separately>

<vl pooling

a> Cargo pool: 28

b> Revenue pool: 28

cl Net result pool: 27

<vi> Conference rights

5 consortia hold single voting rights in conferences in which

they participate.

4 consortia whilst not having formal voting rights in

conferences do nevertheless act in that way.

- 5 -

<vii> Marketing

a> Joint marketing: 18

<some limited by regions>

b> Joint bill of lading: 22

<viii>Joint Price fixing

7 consortia have pricing fixing authority.

CAACE has indicated that in some cases the consortium would

have the authority to fix prices but that the "no'' in the

descriptive list means that it does not do so in pr~cticc. In

some other trades the consortium operates either outside the

conference or on routes where there is no conference.

<ix> Inland operations

a> Joint consolidation: 18 <some are optional or limited by

regions>

b> Joint haulage: 16 <some are optional or limited by

regions>

<x> Duration/termination

Clauses concerning duration and termination of consortia

agreements are not included in CAACE's list. Of the 23

agreements examined by the Commission:

a> Indefinite duration until cancellation/termination: 11

b> Limited duration or without prolongation clause: 10 <2

agreements do not contain clear provisions>

- 6 -

c> Cancellation/termination

36 months notice: Agreement

24 months notice: 2

12 months notice: 6

6 months notice: 8

Specific rules: 4

d> Without cancellation/termination clause: 1

<xi> Purposes/obiectives of consortia agreements

This aspect has not been dealt with by CAACE's descript1v~

list. In the 23 agreements the following clauses ~re tyr·ict-\l:

"The purpose of the Agreement is to establish a joint

service/consortium capable of securing the economies c:.md

advantages of modern shipping technology through coordinated

management of roll-on/rol!-off .• container or similar moderr:

vessels, and all related activities".

"To enable tlv~ parties to operate a service as defined in the

agreement in the most economical and efficient way; to

promote and maximize the trade and the movement of cargoes

between the points and ports referred to".

"The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize the pa~ties to

continue their joint service in the trades cove~ed by this

Agreement".

"The purpose of this Agreement is to enable the parties

collectively to establish and maintain a superior overall

common carrier shipping service, and thereby to promote ~o

oceanborne commerce, in the trade between ". . . ,:md ... ".

- 7 -

"The purpose of the Agreement is to allow the p;;trtners hel'etc•

to operate as ~n ocean common carrier by direct call or

intermodal through service under the name ... as provided

herein".

"The purpose of the Agreement is to permit the pc:trt ie:.; to

achieve efficiencies and economics in offering service~ in

the trades covered by the Agreement".

"To cooperate in the operation of a joint container service

between ... and the ... -including the inland movement of

containers - for the purpose of achieving optim~l economic

results through operation of container vessels and sh<:~rins

the outcome through money pool upon the terms and conditions

set forth in the agreement".

3.3. MIUtiple membe~~~~LR

a> According to the information avai}able there are ~7 Europ0an

shipping 1 irws p.wticipating in 35 consortia servine. rur·~··p,.•.:tn

trades. <In the remaining 5 consortia serving European trades

there seem to be no European shipping lines participating>.

Some of these shipping lines are members of more than one

consortium :

CGM participates in 13 consortia

Ned lloyd " 12 " Hapag Lloyd " 11 " P&OCL· " 7 " CMB " 6 " Swedish Transocean " 5 " !nco trans " 4 "

Cunard

£1\f:

Charente Harrisson

Ellet•man

Lloyd Triestino

Wilh. Wilhelmsen

Finncarriers

Hoegh

Johnson

Wallenius

DAL

Delmas-Vieljeux

- 8 -

5 lines each participate in 3 consortia

7 lines each participate in 2 consortia

b> Shipping lines which are members of a consortium are in many

cases also member of a conference. Some conferences have,

among their members, the participants in more than one

consortium. ror instance, as shown in Annex III,

- the members of the consortia CAROL, EURO-Caribe, S.A.C. and

Streamline are all members of the Association of West Inrlia

Transatlantic Steamship Lines, the WITASS Conference;

- the members of the consortia OMEX, Scan Dutch, TRIO, 1\CE ~HKl

Med Club are members of the Far Eastern Freight Conference;

It should be noted that there are also other situations in

European liner shippinB trades. Two examples might be cited:

The Europe/Australia & New Zealand Conference used to h,wc

participants in four consortia among its members <ANZFCS,

ACT<A>ANL, Scancarriers and Scanbarber>. Scancarders vlc:6 t.otl:en

over by one of its members and Scanbarber as well ~s l\CT<Al/\NL

were disbanded, so that this Conference is now almost <exc~pt

for Baltic Shipping Company> identical with the l\NZECS

consortium. As a second example, the UK West Africa Lines Joint

Service <UKW/\L) is a consortium which is also a conference.

- 9 -

~. yiews of shipowner~ and shippers

4.1. CAACE and CENSA have argued, in various submissions to the

commission, that Community shipping lines need to participate in

consortia in order "not to be put at a disadvantage compared with

their competitors, the single entity, multi-trade giants''. In their

view consortia are either excepted, as technical agreements, under

Article 2 of Regulation No 4056/86, or are covered by the blocl:

exemption in Article 3 of the same regulation. for cases not so

covered there should be a group exemption. These views were not

shared by the Union of Greek shipowners who argued that the

Commission should only grant individual exemptions, where

appropriate.

4.2. The British Shippers' council has informed the Commission that, in

its view, consortia are covered neither by Article 2 nor by

Article 3 of Regulation No ~056/86 and that a new block exemption

would be inappropriate. Individual exemptions should be granted

only with special conditions and obl~gations. The European

Shippers' Councils hold similar views, arguing that consortia

should apply for individual exemption and that conditions and

obligations, including an obligation to meaningful consultations

with shippers, should be attached.

5. The Legal Status of Consortia

The examination of the texts of consortia agreements which have been

made available and of other information available to the Commission

services has led to the following main conclusions:

5.1. Consortiu are not mergers

The information available suggests that consortia could not be

regarded as mergers between the parties, for several reasons:

a> All available agreements contain provisions to terminate the

agreement with different periods of notice.

- 10 -

b> There is no evidence which suggests that any of the parties to

these agreements or to other agreements described by CAACE

either transferred all its assets or activities to the

consortium, so as to become mere holding companies, or completely and irreversibly abandoned business in the area

covered by the consortium.

On the contrary, the parties to consortia agreements remain free

to act independently on other routes, to join consortia

involving other parties for other routes or to join consortia

for other routes involving the same or almost the same parties,

but on different terms. The findings on multiple membership

indicate that this is the case for many shipping lines.

5.2. Consortia are not purely technical arrangements

The information available suggests that there are few if any

consortia agreements whose sole object and effect are to achieve

technical improvements or cooperation in the sense of Article 2 of

Regulation No. 4056/86.

All but two of the 23 agreements examined contain arrangements not

only on joint fleet and terminal operations but also on pooling

and/or conference rights, pricing, marketing or inland operations.

One of the two exceptions concerns a Slot Charter Agreement

containing ~rranRements on joint sch~dule and space/slnt exch~nRe

and arrangements on c~pacity restrictions for one of th0 p~rties

regarding certain European ports. The other case concerns an

agreement containing arrangements on joint fleet and terminal

operations. However, it also provides for cost sharing arrangements

for ships, administration and equipment. In addition it provides

that conference trading rights may only be exercised by agreement

of the consortium policy committee and that the parties, without

having joint marketing, "may combine their interests".

In all these cases the consortium's sole object and effect are not

purely technical.

- 1 1 -

There are, according to CAACE's descriptive list, some other

consortia agreements limited to arrangements on joint fleet ~nd

terminal operations. However, these agreements cannot be regarded

as purely technical since for instance one agreement also contains,

inter alia, the parties' agreement to avoid unreasonable or unfair

sales and marketing competition amongst themselves through ,:, ceommon

freight policy. Such agreements restrict competition and cannot be

considered as having exclusively technical objects and effects. Finally, the parties to consortia agreements regulate the use of

their vessel capacities in given trade routes and are actual or

potential competitors.

For all these reasons consortia cannot, other than perhaps in very

exceptional cases, be considered as falling within the scope of

Article 2 of Council Regulation ~056/86.

5.3. ~onsortia dre not covered by the conference block exemption

a> Conferences are arrangements whicp exist essentially to ensure

that their members charge the same rates of freight. Some

conferences also agree members' participation in a particular

trade <which is defined either as sililinn right5, i(• the l'i;?,ht

to berth x number of sailings per annum from one area to another

or as percentage shares in the trade> or even 'pool' either

earnings or liftings <freight tons> or both: the intention

generally being to equate 'share' with earnings and liftings.

Consortia are pursuing different objectives and ~re different in

organisation. The size of container ships <say 3 to 6

conventional ships = 1 container ship> means that most single

shipping companies are no longer capable of providing, on their

own a satisfactory liner service to shippers. To be viable, a

shipping service must provide a frequent, say weekly, service to

its customers. Rationalisation of schedules is, therefore, ~

sine qua non of liner shipping with each participating line

being allocated slots for each sailing. This is not the role of

conferPnces.

- 12 -

Shipowners agree that consortia are different from confcrene~s.

bl <consortia agreements, restrict or eliminate competition

between the parties in some or all of the following areas:

the provision and use of capacity and transport facilities

- timings and sailings

- marketing

- inland operations

- their policies as conference members and

- price competition <which is eliminated either by conference

membership, or by arrangements in the consortium agreements

which are to that extent equivalent to a confer~nce

agreement, or by some combination of the two>.

A considerable number of consortia agreements thlts cont~in

restrictive arrangements which go beyond the scope of Article

3 of Council Regulation No 4056/86 and would therefore not be

covered by the block exemption.for conferences, even if they

could be considered as conference agreements. This is the

case for most of the 23 agreements available to the

Commission and it would also be the case for the majority of

the other agreements mentioned in CAACE's list.

c> Consortia are increasingly concerned with combined sea/land

door-to-door transport. Multilateral agreements on combined

sea/land transport are not covered by the conference block

exemption, which applies only to the maritime sector.

5.4. It follows that consortia agreements which restrict competition and

affect trade between Member States must, if they are not to be

considered null and void in accordance with Article n5<2l of the

Treaty, be covered either by an individual or by a block exemption.

In view of the number of consortia agreements and the need for

shipowners to retain the flexibility necessary to change their

agreements in response to changing competitive circumstances, it iS

- 13 -

desirable for administrative reasons to give a group exemption as

far as possible. Accordingly the Commission has examined the scope

for granting such a group exemption.

6. Proposal for a bloc\; exempt ion

6.1. Justification

The Community shipping industry needs to attain the necessary

economies of scale to compete on the world liner shipping market.

Consortia can help to provide the necessary means for improving the

productivity of liner shipping services and promoting technical and

economic progress by facilitating and encouraging the use of

containers.

Users of the shipping services offered by consortia obtain several

important advantages. First, they are ensured regular sailings at

prices which do not depend on which ships are used for their

containers. Second, economies of sca_le in the use of ships and

on-shore facilities are achieved. Third, since consortia tend to

bring about higher levels of capacity utilisation, costs are

reduced for this reason also. Fourth, consortia increase the

quality of shipping services by using more modern ships and

equipment as well as port facilities. Last, but not least, through

provision of joint inland services they are responding to many

shippers' requirements for efficient door-to-door transport.

Thus, users can obtain a share of the benefits resulting from the

improvement in productivity and service. However, any group

exemption must give a sufficient guarantee that consortia are able

to realise their advantages to the fullest extent and that users

get a fair share of the resulting rationalisation and reduction in

costs.

In order, therefore, to ensure that all the requirements of Article

85<3: are met it would be necessary, inter alia, to attach to the

block exemption certain conditions and/or obligations to ensure

- 14 -

that a fair share of the benefits would be passed on to shippers

and that competition in respect of a substantial part of the trades

in question was not eliminated.

6.2. [Qrm.

A group exemption for consortia would need to be ..:1n ltJdeper,dtHlt,

self-contained regulation, rather than an amendment or addition to

any existing regulation, because

- there is a great variety of different consortia arrangements

operating under different circumstances;

- consortia are a specialized form of joint ventures. Despite of

the efforts of the Commission's services and the interested industries, it has proved impossible to draft a blocl: exemption

for joint ventures in general;

- many consortia deal with multi-mod~l transport operations which

fall partly within the scope of Regulation No 4056/86 and partly

under Regulation No 1017/68 and, insofar as containers are

concerned, partly under Regulation No 17/62;

Consortia in liner shipping are a specialised and complex type of

joint venture. Unlike most commercial and industrial joint ventures

the scope, parties, activities and terms of consortia agreements

are frequently altered. It would therefore, as well as for other

reasons discussed above, be extremely difficult to decide which

specific clauses and arrangements of consortia agreements should be

permitted, and in what circumstances. It would also be undesirable

to proceed in this way because it would often make legal advice

necessary, and perhaps individual exemption by the Commission each

time the terms of a consortium agreement are altered. A block

exemption for consortia should therefore concentrate on clarifying

the requirements under which consortia can be exempted from the

prohibition of cartels pursuant Article 85CJ> of the Treaty, rather

than differentiating between consortia.

- 15 -

6.3. Scope and content of thr block exemption

The block exemption would cover multi-modal as well as purely

maritime consortia and would therefore be adopted on the basis of

Regulation No 4056/86, No 1017/60 and No 17/62.

The group exemption should cover as wide a variety as possibl0 of

the kinds of clauses which are found in consortia agreements.

Since cooperation through consortia is a specific form of

rationalisation cartels which goes further than conferences

the Commission would need to attach some additional requirements to the block exemption. In fixing these requirements, e.g. certain

conditions and/or obligations, the Commission must have regard not

only to the interests of the shipping lines but also to those of

shippers and of other transport modes who may compete with the land

transport operations of members of consortia <for instance, rnact

hauliers in respect of multi-modal consortia>.

The details of these requirements can only be fixed after further

consultations with parties concerned and with Member States in the

Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions.

Nevertheless, as a preliminary statement, the Commission considers

that it would be necessary, in particular, in order to make sure

that the conditions of Article 05<3> are fulfilled :

c i > to ensure that a fair share of the efficiency and oth•.)l'

benefits from consortia could be passed on to shippers;

Cii> to ensure that competition in respect of a substantial

portion of the whole trade is not eliminated or unduly

restricted, for instance by agreements between consortia

operating in the same trade;

<iii> to provide a maximum period of notice for withdrawal without

penalty by a participant line;

- , 6 -

<iv> to deal, in the case of multi-modal transport services

offered by consortia, with multilateral agreements with

inland hQuliers on through rates;

<v> to ensure non-discrimination between shippers or ports.

In addition, there would need to be obligations relating, inter

alia, to meaningful consultations with shippers, and rights for

shippers to arrange their own inland haulage, if they wish.

The group exemption for consortia will take account, among oth~r

things, of the fact that almost all members of consorti8 ar0 8l~o

members of conferences governed by Regulation 4056; the

requirements of the group exemption will deal with the additional

limitations of competition brought about by consortia.

6.4. The Commission considers that it would be desirable to grant a

group exemption for consortia agreements. The Commission has

thereby prepared the attached propos~l <Annex IV> for a Council

Regulation which would empower the Commission to grant a block

exemption for consortia on the lines set out above. This enabling

regulation follows the standard lines of such regulations ~nd

accordingly does not call for any specific comments.

The Commission intends to clarify the position under competition

law of multimorlal transport containing a shipping leg

simultaneously with the group exemption on consortia.

CM~

Ccmit.~ ,;11!'1 Assoclaticne d'Arr-..ate!!n <he Co~unaut6a Eurep~nnes

I rteet operatlot~a ll Teral_;;rf Poolll't1J ,~, /~b;lad r I ·- r.u'lletlft!J 1"9 tiCI'e2 ll2ril 1990

i • tr tA1 • .. - .. i ; 8 .. l • ~ ~ - 1111 , I V - .. .. 'U e;: - e. l • a • .. • • ..

~g .. .. .t~ ~ - " .. ...

#:

~-.. !."0 t ... .... .. • ,

" 0:: ... , ... .: a -c .. v ,_ - •ClOt l 0 .... ... • • t• IJ ... a. .. ,.: .. .. • , • :=: • .. .. ..

~~ ... ~ .. g. 0:: .. .. ... OIC ..o &! c ~~ .. 5 .. c .. • &~; .s c .. .:- c• 0:: ... 3.:: ~ -oo i;li .. .. .. ... -· c;g -CMOZTP 5_tm'Iro rornr: 0 o-o olt. • • • oo 0

~-= o- 0 Ccmhrt=t~ e=ettrtle .... ... . ..... ...... o -u u .. c ...... .... ....,_ .... .. -· rt•e.ber• l :r ) _j_ 5 5 l 0 ., JO 11 u l) 14 .Jl.

Non Conference Johnson Blue Star Line (UK), East Scanst11r Asiatic c• (OK) yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes no yea yea yes yes yes

US-conferences Sa gum ex Hapag Lloyd (D), CGH {F), (for North GCL (Cunard, UK, Incotrans, Y!!S yes no yes yes yes no no no no no no .no no no Atlantic and IlL, SWedish Traneoce11n, Gulf! lofallenius, S)

Canadian St.La~ canada M11riti~ - c~prlslng 11. Altantic Co-ordiMteC! CMB (B) & CP Ships (Can) yes yes no yes yes yes no no no no no no no no no E&.W Bound Services and ~~ Containerline {UX) (D) Freight confe-rences

Association of Caribbean Charente Steamship c• Ltd w. InC! ia Trans- O\•ersea11 (T&J Harrison Managers) yes yes no yu yes yea rra yes yes no no yes no n'3 no at lllnt ic Stear.. Lines (UK). Jtapag-Lloyd (D), yes Ship Linea (CAROL) Nedlloyd (NLI. CCH (F) for

Ree fer

Association of SAC ftapag-Lloyd {D) • w. lndi!l Tran~- nicaragua National Line yes yes yea no yes yea yes yes f1!!8 no yes yes no yes yea atlantic Steam Ship Lines IWITASSI

In so:ne cases, the consorti•Jm wt>uld have the authority to price-fix but the •no~ reflect~ that it does not do so. lA)

(D) Kt>qotlsted and agr~ jointly, and indentic<'~l, hnt not i~ {act ~ j:>int contrllcts•. (F.I In some tr~des. the consortlu~ ~rt>r~te~ either outside the conferener or on ro••tes '"herE! ther~ i:-: 110 conferl'n!:e. Tn "uo:-h casee the con!lortium is eng:cqll!d in joJnt pt'it:!" !i··!.-n.

-1-

~ ;p

.""r•

2. z. m X

-'

~

CMCE

.J _j l ~ - • • .. .4 ... l ~ ; .. l • :! ~ , • u ...

'0 :::: ... ... l ~ ~ • .. ~g e. ... ..

!: xa: ¥' 2. .. ~':; l ... u c ... ,

• .!:I' i .. ... ... u • • i5~ ,c ... .. • , • .. •.;! ~2 ... .... g. c .. c ... c .. c .. • . ...... - u u g. ... 0 .... ... c .. • .. CC:&I CO' .'Ol!Il~ f:l:!Yl~ ~r2rr; 0 :tiC o- oa. 0 0 • • • gg~ C:~fenn.ee c~e:ortla ..... • • • ....... ... a -u u .. c rt•cber•

I _2 ) 4 ~- 6 7 It ' 10

l:arcpean/Scoat'b r:urandea h~Ule • CtrP (Perrul no no no ,. .. yn ,. .. ru no ,... no ftaqell11n C~f•-

t;uore~.ar (Chil~l renee

h~!!.-:tr..eath l:':troeel cr.l (II. CEAY (Chile). ltt~q heiflc: " Lloyd (OJ N~dlloyd (NL •

no Jll~llan Cent•- PSliC (UK) • Transnav~ Y•• ,. .. no r•• ,. .. r•• ,... ,... no renee (Ecuador). Linabol (Bolivia) •

CGl4 (Fl. Laser lsl

Aaaoc:lat1cm of 'II. India "rrena- E11ro /l:JI r U.. ~ (Pl. Repe9 Lloyd (D). r•• ,... no r•• ,... r•• no ,... no = at.lentle st .. a U••Ul~ INLI :blp Llnu ~'DIS I

~.l"'l'!fllnU.ne Joint. ccm- C!"..S (D) • RZAL (NL). Hav~nlijn • Etrazll tal.ner (m.l. lfedlloyd OCLJ • Ahn~;h (!!d) Co:lfereneae lrU"'Flees HSDO (DI. StAS (Pl. ~rl•• (UKI- Y•• ,. .. no ,... ,. .. r•• yes no no no

r:~r. Blue St•r. Lll•port &. Holt. ltoulder &. f'.oya 1 r.~a i 1

Aaeo:!etloa of u. lndl• Tnt'lll- Laser Jo'lmiiO!I Llne (S). Effoa-•tlafttle Steam Strear.~ Finland St~amship. (Fin) ,... ,... ,. .. ,... ,... r•• ,.., ,... ,... ~ Sl\lp Llnea

Royal M!!il Lin~R {U}{, &. cwrnssJ Flomerca !Guate~r.a} a I

ea~n:. Afrlea 3caec!l ce~t crJ. 001\.L (Dl • Coafarenes Ell•r••" (UK). T £ J narrl•"" (~I Y•• y•• no , .. ,.. Y•• no no no 1\0

P&OCL (UK)

(a) tft •a.e .:.eae. t~• eoneortlua vo11l~ ~••• t~a authority to prlr:a•flK bvt the •no• rarl~t• that 1t do•• not do ao.

r .. ~ • e a .. Ill ... D ... ll

,. ..

1:0

1':0

" .

,...

no

-2-

~L-

lA)

g • • • • ... • ... u .. .. ... ... .. -1 , ...c .. 1 .a .. a. ..

"' ... ... ... ~c 0#0 ., c ... c .. c. r: ... -~~ -c: .. ~-~

D ... DO D .... .. .... ...11. ... u _ll _H l5

r•• no no no

ft::l no no no

r•• no "" ""'

no no 1'!0 no

,... ftO ,... ,...

no 110 '10 , flO

LU~- -

• '>-0(.)

;

C1111Cl'!

~-opentloM I l Tualnat.ll ,_lln9 ~~~ ~~b tales J rlv~ =artetlftfJ lt>f s-ntlcea

i • r (A) • ... ... ... ~ .. l I : ~ :! i ~

... c

' "' .. - ~ .., ... ... ... l .. • • • • - ..... ~& e • .. ..

!S~~ i! .. u .. ... I! !. ..

X."' 8 .. ... - .; , u c .... ::J t:• .. a ... c .. 1 • .... l 0 ..... uu Q, • • ·- a.. -,c M ..

uC , • i::~

., .. .. •• ~~ ... g. c: .. .. ... •c ..0 ... c u.C ... c .. c .. • ..... c c .. c:- c. c c:t>"'~Ql'!t~ :iJ;E!l~ r:ull'J~

... :u: & ... o '(;!. ... c .. ,. .. CC61 ... ... -· -c: ... 0 0-< 00 • • • 000 0 0 .. o- 00 0 C:onh~ Con earth .., •• • ...... ~o -u u .. c: u u .. ..... ....o ~ ... ~u ...... neahen 1 1_ ) 4 __s ~ _j 8 9 10 11 12 ll 14 !..1.

C:C!:t ht"'t/V .. t Vessel Sex:-. !lavale Delmas, yea ,. .. no no r•• yaa no no no no no no = no no Afrlt:a COnfe- Sharing Ned lloyd retee CO'Ifl'C Agreement

CcmtU..nt/V. E\f1\S OSI. Ctl9l, Cl (t.'X), hba (t''K) Afrit:a Confe- r•• ,. .. r•• yu r•• )'«I 1!0 no no no 'fll yn DO ~ no re.:a

C:o=tt 1.11.-nt/ Scadoa 11'. Africa

!!owvll !Hl. ~L lSI, mo (r) yea r•• Y'IU y~ts r•• ytl yrs ytl )"rl no yes yes no yes yes

Co:shr~•

1:~/:0U'tb. ~tb Afrlct~ au {Ill, c:c1 (1'1, CO (F), DAL I.%. African Europe Cettt. (D), Z:lltrsan R•rrl•on Contaln•r Coahrence Service Ltd L!ne (UK), Lloyd Trl••tlno (11, ytl r•• r•• yu yea r•• J'll r•• r•• no r•• ,... C'!) ytl yae

hdlloyd (m.l, P&OCI. {til( ,I, !Cl !af.,.rlne (S .11 .l

mt 11'. Afriea moo.L CJ (~1. h 1e t.!ne (t.'ltl, Cdn<oa Ltl>ta .roi!'lt Gulf Llne IUXJ, Bleck Star ~~n~ S~le•• (Chana), F.NSL Ollgl, lllqarlan yu J'U tt• yu re• 'f111 T .. yu no - fH J'U re• ~· :fl!!l Cr_,. LlAe !tUg), ex% (Zaire),

(::)) (D) Sltraa (Iwory Cnaat), C•••hlp (C.-rD<~na I. eot..na~~ ~,., l nt Providence L '·!.!!!~ing(r ... ib

Red Sea

~ ftll!:!la P:xpres!l

Canard (~). Mer~•rlo It\ yell Service yae ,.. ItO r· no ,. .. ItO yell no 1:10 - no eo ~0 bat Conf. CHA 1F), VT.B reutfra~ht (II . Seerederei (DSR}

.·- ... (ll) tn- <e~~aaa, t'he eoM<>rtlu• voul" ,..,.. t;,e •"tl•'>•:ty to p;l~to·fi.IC b<>t t"'• •.,o• r,.fleeta U•"t. it ~oe• not +., ""· (CI t.i•Hed t,o r•t~lo~. (DI \.'7:Wllt. la beth the ~oneortl.,. •"" u,, L'?f0hr•11r•. ~<• ·utt•r, lt •nJ"9•e l., '"tnt p.:lee·fl•tn~. (!I 111 .. ~ tud~e. t.ht e-o"e"rtt•,. ~s:•tora "1~ .. ,::­

ovtalde the conferel'ce OT on route• w!\t! .. a th<ora 1• "" cn~r .. r-en~: ... Jn •""" c•••"· ttl• cmaortlue h en..-qc.' Jn lolnt pYlt't•fllll"'l·

-3-

--

~ w?

CMCB

I Plut cpentlonal ~Pool1119 I ~~ H~EJ~1 ble=o J Jbrtellftt ht pent htM

• ... .. i • ... 'tt ... l • ! :! ... !': .g I U ... ~;~ c;: ... ...

l • .. =g e • ... .. .c ~. .. !.'; l ... u c ... ,

~c .. • e!J' i 0 ..... ... u • • ,c .. .. • , • i. g ... • • ~:! ... .... g. c: .. c u.c ... c .. c: .. • ... ... «'~'!2!!IIa :u;~~~ J::li~~ ...

!.l: ~ ..oo ~!. ... c: .. • .. 8C&I C011fennee 0 0 .. D 0 • • • 0 0 Co:uortla ..... •• • ..... .. ....o -- u u .. c .Jl. u • Hnbeu

_) 2 ) c ..1. .-6. ~ I! 9 JO

hnd~ ~lnd :lteraan (L"XI. rurnaae Vlt~y (L~I. Conf•r•nce Cc!!talnar Zla (Ia) ru yea no yu r•a yea r•a yea no 1!0 lc"leea

. Lin'!:!!t ~r- !fear J:aat r:::ot. (D) • ~Sif (I!L) yu yea r•a y .. ,... yaa yaa yea yu 1:20 r~• - T'llrk.,. Container eoata~•- Ll,... 12. :u~ ~ CO!If•r•nc•

r.r .. \-eet~lft.ll- t'Wal!hlt ~dl&lt ~raneoe•an (G) • vlan Aaaoelatlcn~ Orlcnt LiMa Plnncarrlcra (Plnl y .. yea yea yn yea :r•• yea :r•• yea 0

(PJ

b~le" oeca:s easrrtcon~• CQt (11. rtapag Lloyd lb) • Ialanc! Cc=fa- I'OtP (Pl. Sul Ctll. l:l'fm (Hat!a- yn r•• no yu rea ,. .. rea rea rea no renee qaaearJ. ~c (P) (C'-cor-e*)

• lA) In ao.. caaae. tbe eonaortlu• vou14 have tha authority tD price-fix but t~e •no• reflect• that lt eoa• not do eo. (11 tto ttc lleaben but opeute to/frot~ Ett porta.

r (A J ... I :. ... ~ • e .. • .. .. ... ::r ... , , I .. 2 .,Q-o a. ..

'II .. r .. .. ... uo 61 .s c .. c-o c. c ... _,. -g -0 ~- o- 0 .... .... ... ~ -ll 12 1) ·u ..ll

eo M !10 "" no

:r•• yea no yn ftO

no r•a r•a :raa yea

.

rob n:) ao no ItO

-4-

' !4 o. .

CAAC'E

~·~ ope ret rona Jl Tn•l~t;f -

., Poolln9 1~1 '~ ~l9hs nsnul.., ea.,. tate:tS .f f"t'ent lmw

... • ... (AI • ... .. .. l ~ ~ c ...

l • ~ ~ .. c • , I " .. : ;~ .. a ...

"" e;: .. ... g • • • .. • • .. ec e. .. .. --

.. u .. ... ""' 2·

.... x.; l "" - .. ..01 - • , u c • 0 ... , t ... :r -oc .. "" 1 • •"' ! 0 ...... uu • • .~~ .. "".,. .. ,c .. .. • , • i=~ "" ... ..... • • .. . ... .... 0 c .. "' ... ..c "'" .., c u""' .. cc c .. c .. ~ • ...... s c ... C-< c• c

~Ql!Ua :I:!lYlP';i t:Ul!Qtt .... ~:: & ...a

~1 .... c .. > .... cc .. - -- -c -0 0 ... 00 • • • ODe> 0 0 .. o- DO 0 Confere-nce Contartla ., • • • .,., .,0 ~u u .. c UU> ~ ""'0 ..... .,u .....

nt~u J 2 J • ~ (, 7 0 9 10 11 12 lJ 14 1i

rar eaat rralq~t lC: ~L (Slnq),OOCL (~). ~orca Co:~ferencc Shipping Corp. (S.X.o.), Cho

Yanq Shlpplnq (S.~.o.) yea ,. .. no no ,. .. Y.• r•• no no no no ~ no no 11'0

ett~rtttcr ~· J'ret ~nk & ~nk Line (L~l. Col~~• Line ., .. Ll~u ~· col=-""us (0) y .. r•• r•• no yu fll yn ru ,. .. no r-• )'¢!1 no ,. .. ,... ::a, 1 •:n 1 en krnnt hperta Ccl (t) (C) • t l:loasc.a

tD~:)Mden tnt!onub (J') Djekmrta Lloyd I 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 7 1 7 1 COI'Ifercoca :at. Llna• cnurl Ll~ 7 7

Djan..-trl Triton Lloyd (tmxl)

seeod•ra lndo~ala

~r ~tten r.TrCll I!CHP (F), Lloyd Trieatino (I). rrd._,t coah- (P"...rdclcb) no yem no no no tUJT, (J), m'K (J), 0~ yes yes ye yet yes yas yes yes yo a no rcftee (ttalr -

('raiv!!n, !long Kong, Singapore, nJ south P:orea)

1A) tn ~ c••••• the conaortl~ would have th• aut~~lty to prlc.-flx but the ·~· ratla~t• that lt 4oae not ~' ~. (c) Llaltaa ~ re9lona. ta:) In ._. t~•~••• tht con1Klrt1U!II operata• alt'h~r out.•l~e the conlaranca or Ol'l route• vhar• there la no confarcnca. In aucll "'••••· the co,•orth:s

Ia an~a9ed In joint pdca-fhrl~>q. (r) Ito T.t:'C M,.bera but Oli'4rate to/trOll tt:C porta •

•

-s-

~ \

t:eftfer~

~~.,.

rar~ rrelt;;~ C:onfarenc:e

hr r:satttm rral¢t Ccmftt­rccco

CMC:l'!

C~r.rrtlll

tre~aeane

In<!=•• Lit S•r•lc:e

O=tx (I')

rer eactam I eear~te~ Prel~;l'tt C:enftt-r•nc:•

rar !!:atrt:em Trio :rrdqht c:=r ... reoc:e

f:e~/ A-~ &host re Ue • a.: .. cc:ra-r:ecca

I rlnt opentlOfta I l . , Oftf PTI- J:nland ,..,..,,.•hfl "-""9 tr,.,bfl ~r~teu.-.1~ .,. ... u., ... f

t'2W' !'lii ~ St try II?; tvr:ot: fk=!loln

tr•~lloyd (Kt.}, DC (L'XI, SVa<!lah Tranaoc:aan (SJ, Wllh. Wlhaleaan (MI

Cbo Ta"'7 !>hlppln9 (B. P:or) ttor. c s ltHJ J • oocr. (IDt I

• ... " "D • I! u . .. c ... 0 ...

.. 0 .... .... ,c ~.:! :t:: •• 1

yu 1 r••

7 7

c:c:t (rJ. ~ct aabtlc: Co. II:XI I y.. I ru Ua<!11Q74 (KLI, ~<!lab Tran•ocaan (S), WUb. WU'IM~an (1'1)

P&OCI. (tnt) B~n Lin~ (tne), .

JYU I JUJ rtapsq-Lt~ (D) • 1rtX (J) • ·I Hlteul 0!>11. CJI

cc:t (I'). e,psq-t.loyd [D), LlCfd !Tl••tlno (I), ••~11~

ru ra• (P&OCL (tne). SC!:Z (NZI

... l .. c

l ... r )

• ' u ·­.. .. X,';; 0 ... ~~ ... o 0 ... ..,.,

•

..., ..., ... .; !!' (At • .. S1 ... _, c, . c. c ... l5. 0 .. 0 .. .... ..... ..: . . . ... .

... ... • Jtl. ... u ., ... ec ~- S1 l ... ... .. _.,. - : " :! ::~ a. • : =~ I A.5 =. ... l .. c " • '"" "' "' -., • ., g. c .. i•c ., ., ... c .,o

.5"' .s~ .. : " c:~: .5 ! .... ~- !• oX. oo • • • ooo o o .. o- ofi -o -u u N c UU> ..,. ..,o ..,...,. -.u ... (, 7 8 9 10 lJ u ll 14

., c: 0 ~

15

yu I yu1 yu I re• I y .. I r.. I yu no yea1 yee I no rut r••

7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

:re• I re• I :rea I Y.. I re• I y.. I ra• flO :ra•1 ra•t DO 1 r•• 1 ,. ..

no I ruJ re• I r .. I :ra• I ra• I ru I 1'10 I DO I DO I 110 I 110 I 00

.

r•• ru ra• ,..., re•l "f''~ I ,...I ,.~, I e:J 1 rc•1 r•• (G) nly (C) (C) (C)

for ea-

leq

(AI fft ea.. ea .. a. the ~rtla. waul<! h••• the aut~orlty to ~lea-flw but the "no• cafleete that lt ~oaa not ~ ao. (C:) Llalte4 by reqlona. (PI l:o Et:c ~n but operata to/fro. ttc: porta. ICI """'"IJ •o- _,..ben.

-6-

!P 1:-D

CA1\CE

I rJ ... t o;-ntton•_fl Tn•tn•;;j"~tn, _ f - ~

• ... ... ... 1 • r ... 1 • :! :! ~ . ... , ' u ...

!;~ .. '0 .... .... .... 1 • • • .. ....

~g e • .. .. ~

... .1: 2. .. !";; l - .. .. u c ... , .... ,; II .... .. .... 1 0 ..... OIU • • ..z:., ~ ... ,c .. .. • " • ., .. ~~ ~! »• .... " c .. ~.c: .. ... 0::: - ~ .. COl .,. • ....... s . ... cc::roi':Tl! n:rvxn n'nn ... !.:l i ... o o&. ... c: .. • .. C:C:Af ...

C'Oftflt~ C'enaortla 0 0'"" 0 0 • • • ooc 0 ow Ha~n

..... •• .. .. .....o -u u .. c u u ~ ..... .-.o 1 l ] 4 5 ~ ., II 9 10 l1 u

H:!dcan canada Canada r~rltlee, Italia di Conference Line l!avlga~ione (f'inr.\3re) ,Group yes yes no no no yes no no no no no no

Transatl. Espanola (D)

CO"o1l\C The Croup Hoogh (tt). ned lloyd (UL) s~c (P') SHO (F). SWJ\L (SJ • yes yell no no yes yes yes l'01J yes no no no OAL/'IfL (D)

UlC Hid ffCUX Eile~n City Liners (IJ}() conference Trade Furness Withy (IJ}()

Service yes yes no no no yes yes yes yes no no ~0

- -- -

(~) In so~s cases. the consortiu~ would have the authority to price-fix but the •no• reflects that it doas not ~o • (B) Negotiated and agreed jointly. and identical, but not in fact •joint contracts•.

~

(AI 1: 0 • ...

v .. - • .. ... Q,"' ... -IIC 010 c ...

~g -· o-........ ~~~

ll 14

no no

no no

no yes

• "' • .. , 1 .. e ... 0 -· n

no

no

no

-7-

(:4 ~ •

CAAC!!

I rt .. l opeutltn~• ll Tnalns~;rl Poollft9 ~~~ ~~ t•laDG rlths r..riLetl"'J 1"9 "'pent I-

i • S' (AI • ... .... ... ~ c ... l • 2 3 ... I • :J I U ... !~~

01 • '0 ~;: ... ... l • • • ... • • .. Ss e. ... 01 'C .... u .. -I! ,!!. .. &.'0 1 ... ..... ... ~

, u 0:: ... c ... ... a ... II .. 1 • ·r l D ..... &IU • t ~ ~ .a ... :r ... .. .. • , :: • .. .. ~1 ~~ ... 01 ..

~ 2 z:: ... 01 01. /160 01 0:: ... .5 .. c: .. !1 c:- 0:: .. c:• c ... u u

i ...0 ~g .. ~ ~ i

... -· 1! ... cO""•QI'l:I~ tn:EYn!ii ~u 0 3.111 o-o o!. • • • 0 ~; o-o a Ccntf•~ CO:,aertla ~ •• ...... ...,0 -u u .. c: ..., .... - -· ~Ot!>ere 1 , 1 4 5 ~ ' a 9 JO tl u 1) l4 15

!fEU SAM/ Sagu ACL, CGH, (F), Hapag-Lloyd USAKER.I\ (D) y!!s y!!s no Y!!ll Y!!ll ~!I no no no no no no no· no no

"orth E:ur. CGH (F), Hapag-Lloyd (D), North Ao. Incotrans (tl}, Pt.OCL (UK}, Space char- N!!dlloyd (N), S!!aland t!!r and (US} y!!s yes no yes yes yes no no no no no no no no no sallinq agteell!ent

Vessel ~~~~lloyd (N), P&OCL (UK), sharinq Sealanc! (US) yes yes no no yes yea no no no no no no no no no agreement

SEUSA/ VesaeJ Nedlloyd (R), P&OCL (UK), WHRA aharinq Sealand (US), CT£ (£) yes y!!s no no yes yes no no no no no no no no no agreel!t!!nt

M!!xico ACL, Tec01:1ar (H} yes y!!s no no yes yes no no no no no no no no no

(A) In •~ cates, the consortium would have the authority to price-fi~ but the •no• reflects that it does not so.

-7a-

t

~ s '

Lift of r.:onsortit1 nsrecmcnt~ received by the Commission

ANZECS

BEACON

CAROL Operating Agreement

<these thr~e agreements submitted by CAACE in 1987>

ACL

St::an Carriers Scc:m Dutch

ANJ-IEX Il

<these three agreements submitted by their representative5 in 19BB>

!RIO

Nedscans Letter of Intent

Johnson ScanStar

ELIP.OS.l\L

S~edish Orient Line Agreement

W~st Co~st UY Arab Service Operating Agreement Streamlin~ Joint Liner Service Agreement

Canada Maritime Slot Charter Agreement

COSEWFI C·:•cTtrr•rm Services

' I

s.C.I\.D.O.A. -Service Commun d'Armements Desservant l'Ouest A:fric'a·

Joint Container Service Europe - East Coast South America

GOBRA Oper~ting Agreement <covering Phase I>

F~d Sec- Express Service <former CAMEL Mcrzario>

tall tho:?sc- ~greements 5ubmitted by CAI\CE in 1999>

CAROL Lines Jc·int ServicE:· Agreement

Trans Fre-ight Lines Joint Venture AgreeD'tent

Paci!i.r. EUl'•'Pe Express Joint Service Agreement '!t~l ia - d 'Amico Joint Service Ag1•eement

t these f~·'Jr agreements received from the Federal Hari time Commissio

Washington D.C.>

(MULTIPLE MEMBERSHIPS OF LINES/CONSORTIA/CONFERENCES)

I OMEX I JscANDUTCH 1

Cho Yang Shipping (SKO) CGM (F)

NOL (Sing) Nedlloyd (NL)

OOCL (H.K.) East Asiatic (DK)

Wilhel~sen (H)

j F;-R EAS-;~;;-~EIGHT coNFERE-~cEJ

8 P&OCL (UK)

Ben Line (UK)

Hapag Lloyd (0)

NYK (J)

EJ NOL (Sing)

OOCL (UK)

Korea Shipp. Corp. (SKO)

Cho Yang Shipp. (SKO)

I MED cLusJ ·

? (F)

Lloyd Triestino CI>

NOL (Sing.)

HYK (J)

Swedish Transocean (S) Mitsui OSK (J) Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha (J) O~EX

(Taiwan, Hong Kong,

Singapore, South Korea)

,. ~ ''l ~-::

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

r ~ V" •

ACL

s Wa

(MULTIPLE MH~BERSHIP LINES/CONSORTIA/CONFEREffCES)

NEUSARA I USANERA

US/EUROPE RATE AGREE~ENTS

Pacif. Eurax. Express JS/HL/PEX

SAGUMEX

(F)

(NL)

NEW '?

TFL

(UK)

land

CTE (E)

Johnson Scanstar

~ Blue Star (UK)

East Asiatic COIC)

Johnson Line (S)

ll '

Generate Mariti~e

(f)

Ch~rente Stea~ship Co.

(UK)

CONFERENCE

ASSOCIATION OF WEST INDIA TRANSATLANTIC STEAMSHIP LINES

W.I. T .A.S.S.

eo lloyd

(NU

NiJgua Nat. Line (Nicar.>

Johnson l. ine

Finn carriers (Fine>

Royal Mail Lines (UK)

Flomerca (Guate~ala>

I

~ I

ANNEX IV

COUNCIL REGULATION CEEC> No OF

On the application of Article 85<3> of the Treaty to certain ~ntnnnrins

of agreements,

companies.

decisions nnd concerted practices betw.:-•m ~;tupPli•U

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic

Community, and in particular Article 87 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission1,

Having regard to the Opinion of the European Parliament2 ,

Having regard to the Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee3,

Whereas Article 85< 1 > of the Treaty may in accordance with Article

85(3) be declared inapplicable to categor~es of agreements, decisions

and concerted practices which fulfil the conditions contained in

Art i c 1 e 8 5 < 3 ) ;

Whereas the provisions for the application of Article 8513) should be

adopted by way of Regulation pursuant to Article 87; whereas, according

to Article 87<2l<b>, such a Regulation must lay down detailed rules for

the application of Article 85 < 3), taking into account the need to

ensure effective supervision, on the one hand, and to simplify

administration to the greatest possible extent on the other; whereas,

according to Article B7<2><dl, such a Regulation is required to define

the respective functions of the Commission and of the Court of Justice;

1 0. J.

')

-o.J.

3 O.J.

Whereas liner shipping is a capital intensive industry;

c·:mtainerizat ion has increasest pressures for co-operation <mel

r<Jtionalis<lti(m; wht•r·cas the Community !;hipping induc;tl"/ nr>1•d~; tr•

attain the necessary economies of scale in order to compete

successfully on the world liner shipping market;

Whereas joint service agreements between liner shipping companies with

the aim of rationalising their operations by means of technicGl,

operational and/or commercial arrangements <described in shipping

circles as consortin> can help to provide the necessary means for

improving the productivity of liner shipping services and promoting

technical and economic progress:

Whereas users of the shipping services offered by consortia can obtain

a share of the benefits resulting from the improvements in productivity

and service, by means of, inter alia, regularity, cost r·~ciuct it::>ns

derived from higher levels of capacity utilization, better service

quality stemming fr0m improved vessels C!nd equipment, and pff:ici ent

door-to-door transport:

Whereas most consortia deal with multi-modal transport operations which

fall partly within the scope of Council Regulation < EEC l No 4056/8/'

and partly under Council Regulation <EEC> No 1017/685 and, insofar as

containers are concerned, partly under Regulation No 17/62 of the .16 counc1 ;

Whereas the Commission should be enabled to declare by way of

regulation that the provisions of Article 05(1) do not apply to certain

categories of consortia agreements, decisions and concerted pra~tices,

4o.J. No L378, 31.12.1986, p. 4.

5o.J. No L175, 23.7.1968, p. 1; <Special edition 1968 I, p. 302>.

6o.J. No 13, 21.2.1962, p. 204/62; <Special edition 1959-1962, p. 87>.

- 31-

in order to make it easier for undertakings to cooperate in ways which

are economically desirable and without adverse effect from the point of

view of competition policy;

Whereas the Commission, in close and constant liaison with the

competent authorities of the Member States, should be able to define

precisely the scope of these exemptions and the conditions attached to

them;

Whereas consortia in liner shipping are a specialized and complex type

of joint venture; whereas there is a great variety of different

consorticl agreements operating in different circumstances; whereas the

scope, parties, activities or terms of consortia are frequ~?ntly

altered; whereas the Commission should therefore be given the responsibility of defining from time to time the consortia to which the

group exemption should apply;

Whereas, in order to ensure that all th~ conditions of Article 85<3>

are met it would be necessary to attach to the block exemption

conditions to ensure in particular that a fair share of the benefits

would be passed on to shippers and that competition is not eliminated;

Whereas under Article 11<4> of Council Regulation <EEC> No 4056/86,

Article 11(4) of Council Regulation <EEC> No 1017/68, and Article 6 of

Regulation No 17 of the Council, the Commission may provide that a

decision taken in accordance with Article 85<3> of the Treaty shall

apply with retroactive effect; whereas it is desirable that the

Commission be empowered to adopt, by regulation, provisions to the like

effect;

Whereas notification of agreements, decisions and concerted practices falling within the scope of this regulation shall not be made

compulsory, being primarily the responsability of undertakings to see

to it that they conform to the rules on competition, and in particular

to the conditions laid down by regulation concerning liner shipping

Whereas there can be no exemption if the conditions set out in Article

85<3> are not satisfied; whereas the Commission should therefore have

power to take the appropriate measures where an agreement proves to

have effects incompatible with Article 85(3); whereas the Commission

should consequently be able first to address recommendations to the

parties and then to take decisions;

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

1. Without

4056/86,

ARTICLE 1

prejudice to the applications of Regulation <EEC>

Regulation <EEC> No 1017/68 and Regulation No 17,

No

the

Commission may, by regulation and in accordance with Article 85<3>

of the Treaty, declare that Article 85( 1 > shall not apply to

categories of agreements between undertakings, decisions of

associations of undertakings and concerted practices that have as

their object to promote or establish cooperation in the joint

operation of maritime transport services or of combined maritime and

land transport services.

2. Such regulation shall define the categories of agreements, decisions

and concerted practices to which it applies and shall specify the

conditions and oblieations under which, pursuant to Article 85<3> of

the Treaty, they shall be considered exempted from the application

of Article 85<1> of the Treaty.

ARTICLE 2

1. The Regulation pursuant to Article 1 shall be made for a specified

period.

2. It may be repealed or amended where circumstances have chaneed with

respect to any of the facts which were basic to its being made.

-~.)-

APTICLE 3

-:~:-2 regulc::1;.ion cldopt·.?d pursu.;mt to Article 1 may include ,, ~Jl'•JVi~::;:ion

f·~·r•:•: •:>f such regulation,

est~blis~~d therein.

provided they comply with the t:~c·nch tions

ARTICLE 4

Before adopting the regulation, the Commission shall publish a draft

thi?reof to en.:3ble all persons and organizations concerned to submit

their comments within such reasonable time limit, being not less than

on~ month, as the Commission shall fix.

ARTICLE 5

1. Before publishin~ the draft regulati.c•n and before ~4ck•pting th('

regulation the Commission shall consult:

a> The Advisory Committee on Agreements and Dominant Po:-;i tior1 in

Maritime Transport established by Article 15<3> of Regulation

<EEC> No 4056/86;

b\ the Advisory Cor,mittee on Restrictive Practices and M·:·nopolies in

the Transport Industry established by Article 16<3> of Regulation

<EEC) No 1017/68;

cl the Advisot'Y Committee on Restrictive Practices ·;md Mon0polies

established by Article 10<3> of Regulation 17.

~. Parasraphs 5 and ~ of said provisions, relating to consultation with

the Advisory Committees, shall apply, it being understood that joint

meetings with the Commission shall take place not earli0r than one

m•:•nt:h ;_lf~.J·r· .:-t~:.p;4t:ch of the n•)tice convening them.

ARTICLE 6

1. Where the persons concerned are in breach of a condition or

obligation which attaches to an exemption granted by the Regulation

adopted pursuant to Article 1, the Commission may, in order to put

an end to such a breach:

- address recommendations to the persons concerned, and

- in the event of failure by such persons to observe those

recommendations, and depending on the gravity of the breach

concerned, adopt a decision that either prohibits them from

carrying out, or requires them to perform, specific acts nr, while

withdrawing the benefit of the block exemption which they enjoyed,

grants them an individual exemption in accordance with Article

11<4> of Regulation <EEC> No 4056/86, Article 11(4) of Regulation

<EEC> No 1017/60 and Article 6 of Regulation No 17, as

appropriate, or withdraws the benefit.of the block exemption which

they enjoyed.

2. Where the Commission, either on its own initiative or at the request

of a Member State or of natural or legal persons claiming a

legitimate interest, finds that in any particular case an agreement,

decision or concerted practice to which the block exemption granted

by the regulation adopted pursuant to Article applies,

nevertheless has effects which are incompatible with Article 8~(3)

or are prohibited by Article 86, it may withdraw the benefit of the

block exemption from those agreements, decisions or concerted

practices and t.:~kr! all appropriate me;:~sures for thf' pur·pn•;e <:1f

bringing these infringements to an end, pursuant to Article 13 of

Regulation <EEC> No 4056/86, Article 13 of Regulation <EEC> No

1017/68 and Article 8 of Regulation No 17, as appropriate.

3. Before taking a decision under paragraph 2, the Commission may

address recommendations for termination of the infringement to the

persons concerned.

ARTICLE 7

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its

publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and · directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels,

For the Council

The President