- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-581/23, Beevers Kaas: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 May 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen – Belgium) – Beevers Kaas BV v Albert Heijn België NV, Koninklijke Ahold Delhaize NV, Albert Heijn BV, Ahold België BV (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Prohibition – Vertical agreements – Article 101(3) TFEU – Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 – Block exemption – Article 4(b)(i) – Hardcore restriction that removes the benefit of that exemption – Exception – Exclusive distribution agreements – Restriction of active sales in an exclusive territory – Concept of agreement – Concurrence of wills between the supplier and its buyers – Proof – Exclusive territory allocated to a buyer – Absence of active sales by other buyers in that territory)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CA0581
62023CA0581
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C series
—
C/2025/3378
(Case C-581/23,
(1)
Beevers Kaas)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Prohibition - Vertical agreements - Article 101(3) TFEU - Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 - Block exemption - Article 4(b)(i) - Hardcore restriction that removes the benefit of that exemption - Exception - Exclusive distribution agreements - Restriction of active sales in an exclusive territory - Concept of ‘agreement’ - Concurrence of wills between the supplier and its buyers - Proof - Exclusive territory allocated to a buyer - Absence of active sales by other buyers in that territory)
(C/2025/3378)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Beevers Kaas BV
Defendants: Albert Heijn België NV, Koninklijke Ahold Delhaize NV, Albert Heijn BV, Ahold België BV
Intervening party: B. A. Coöperatieve Zuivelonderneming Cono
Operative part of the judgment
Article 4(b)(i) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 330/2010 of 20 April 2010 on the application of Article 101(3) [TFEU] to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices
must be interpreted as meaning that, where a supplier has allocated an exclusive territory to one of its buyers, the mere finding that the other buyers of that supplier do not engage in active sales in that territory is not sufficient to establish the existence of an agreement between that supplier and those other buyers concerning the ban on active sales in that territory, for the purpose of applying that provision.
Article 4(b)(i) of Regulation No 330/2010
must be interpreted as meaning that the benefit of the exception provided for in that provision is granted for the period for which it is shown that there is acquiescence by a supplier’s buyers to the supplier’s invitation not to make active sales in the exclusive territory allocated to another buyer.
—
(1) OJ C C/2023/1435.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3378/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—