Judgment of the Court (Full Court) of 6 January 2004.

Bundesverband der Arzneimittel-Importeure eV and Commission of the European Communities v Bayer AG.

Appeals - Competition - Parallel imports - Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty (now Article 81(1) EC) - Meaning of agreement between undertakings - Proof of the existence of an agreement - Market in pharmaceutical products.

Joined cases C-2/01 P and C-3/01 P.



Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex Autres Liens
Judgment (OJ)
20/02/2004 BAI and Commission v Bayer
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2004:2
06/01/2004 BAI and Commission v Bayer
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2004:2
06/01/2004 BAI and Commission v Bayer
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2003:299
22/05/2003 BAI and Commission v Bayer
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

2004 I-00023

Subject-matter

Appeal against the judgment in Case T-41/96, in which the Court of First Instance annulled Commission Decision 96/478/EC of 10 January 1996 relating to a proceeding under Article 85 of the EC Treaty (Case IV/34.279/F3 ─ Adalat) -- Meaning of an agreement between undertakings -- Proof of the existence of an agreement

Systematic classification scheme

1.
B European Community (EEC/EC)
  B-19 Legal proceedings
    B-19.10 Appeals
B European Community (EEC/EC)
  B-07 Competition
    B-07.03 Implementation of the competition rules
      B-07.03.02 Procedure for the application of the competition rules by the Commission
        B-07.03.02.08 Decision of the Commission
B European Community (EEC/EC)
  B-07 Competition
    B-07.01 Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
      B-07.01.01 Prohibition of agreements, decisions and concerted practices
        B-07.01.01.01 Agreements of undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices
B European Community (EEC/EC)
  B-07 Competition
    B-07.01 Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
      B-07.01.01 Prohibition of agreements, decisions and concerted practices
        B-07.01.01.01 Agreements of undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices
B European Community (EEC/EC)
  B-07 Competition
    B-07.01 Agreements, decisions and concerted practices
      B-07.01.01 Prohibition of agreements, decisions and concerted practices
        B-07.01.01.01 Agreements of undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Operative part

Opinion


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 05/01/2001

Date of the Opinion

  • 22/05/2003

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

06/01/2004


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Applications: OJ C 79 from 10.03.2001, p.14

Judgment: OJ C 59 from 06.03.2004, p.2

Name of the parties

BAI and Commission v Bayer

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Koenigs, Folkmar: Vorliegen einer gegen den EG-Vertrag verstoßenden Vereinbarung über ein wettbewerbsbeschränkendes Verhalten?, Der Betrieb 2004 p.249 (DE)
  2. Klees, Andreas: Einseitige Maßnahmen eines Herstellers als Vereinbarung bei Parallelimporten von Arzneimitteln? - Adalat, Betriebs-Berater 2004 p.291-292 (DE)
  3. Schulz, Axel: Bayer/Adalat - A Unilateral Decision?, European Law Reporter 2004 p.20-21 (EN)
  4. Urlesberger, Franz: Einseitige Behinderung von Parallelimporten mangels Vereinbarung kein Verstoß gegen Art. 81 EG, Ecolex 2004 p.121-122 (DE)
  5. Rosenfeld, Andreas: Nachweis einer (konkludenten) Kartellvereinbarung zur Unterbindung von Paralleleinfuhren in Vertriebsnetzen - Adalat, Recht der internationalen Wirtschaft 2004 p.298-300 (DE)
  6. Kamann, Hans-Georg ; Bergmann, Ellen: Einseitige Vertriebsbeschränkungen und Art. 81 EG-Vertrag - Folgerungen aus dem Bayer-Adalat-Urteil des EuGH und dem Volkswagen-Urteil des EuGH, Europäisches Wirtschafts- & Steuerrecht - EWS 2004 p.151-155 (DE)
  7. Cot, Jean-Mathieu: La notion d'entente dans la jurisprudence communautaire récente, Revue de jurisprudence de droit des affaires 2004 p.603-606 (FR)
  8. Eilmansberger, Thomas: Die Adalat-Entscheidung des EuGH - Maßnahmen von Herstellern zur Steuerung des Verhaltens von Vertriebshändlern als Vereinbarung im Sinne von Art. 81 EG, Zeitschrift für Wettbewerbsrecht 2004 p.285-304 (DE)
  9. Brown, Christopher: Bayer v Commission: the ECJ Agrees, European Competition Law Review 2004 p.386-389 (EN)
  10. Vidmar, Matija: Prepoved vzporednega uvoza zdravil, Evropsko pravo in praksa 2004 nº 1 p.58 (SL)
  11. Van Sasse van Ysselt, Ch.R.E.M.: Adalat: een gebruiksaanwijzing, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2004 p.121-126 (NL)
  12. Ruiz Calzado, Xavier: ¿Cabe adoptar legalmente medidas orientadas a limitar el comercio paralelo? Reflexiones sobre la sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia en el asunto Bayer/Adalat, Unión Europea Aranzadi 2004 nº 5 p.5-11 (ES)
  13. Parret, L.Y.J.M.: Markt & Mededinging 2004 p.149-152 (NL)
  14. Prieto, Catherine: Chronique de jurisprudence du Tribunal et de la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes, Journal du droit international 2004 p.616-618 (FR)
  15. Bocken, Jan: Nieuw juridisch weekblad 2004 p.737 (NL)
  16. Hoffmann, Jochen: Parallelausfuhren im Europäischen Wettbewerbsrecht nach der "Bayer"-Entscheidung, Wettbewerb in Recht und Praxis 2004 p.994-1004 (DE)
  17. Colangelo, G.: Il Foro italiano 2004 IV Col.421 (IT)
  18. Bastianon, Stefano: I segreti del caso "Bayer". Ovvero: intesa anticompetitiva e integrazione dei mercati, Il Foro italiano 2004 IV Col.421-425 (IT)
  19. Claudel, Emmanuelle: Entente et concours de volonté. De la dénaturation à l'harmonie, Recueil Le Dalloz 2004 Jur. p.1970-1971 (FR)
  20. Idot, Laurence: Entente. En matière de relations verticales, pour qu'il y ait accord et non comportement unilatéral, la Commission doit apporter la preuve d'une offre du fabricant et d'une acceptation des revendeurs, Europe 2004 Mars Comm. nº 84 p. 24-25 (FR)
  21. Vilmart, Christine: Importations parallèles. La Commission désavouée par la CJCE (6 janv. 2004) qui confirme la conception restrictive des ententes prohibées déjà adoptée par le TPICE, La Semaine juridique - entreprise et affaires 2004 p.752-756 (FR)
  22. Curto Polo, Mercedes: El concepto de acuerdo en el Derecho de la libre competencia: comentario al asunto al asunto Bayer AG (sentencia del TJCE de 6 de enero de 2004), Revista General de Derecho Europeo 2004, nº 4, p. 1-14 (ES)
  23. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2005 nº 35 (NL)
  24. Brammer, Silke: The Columbia Journal of European Law 2005 p.437-449 (EN)
  25. Nagy, Csongor István: A vertikális megállapodás, mint a kartelltilalom küszöbfogalma: összehasonlító jogi elemzés és értékelés, Versenytükör 2011 1. szám p.20-35 (HU)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Information not available

Subject-matter

  • Competition
  • - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices

Provisions of national law referred to

Information not available

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

  • Actions for annulment
  • Appeals : dismissal on grounds of inadmissibility
  • Appeals : dismissal on substantive grounds

Formation of the Court

Assemblée plénière (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Edward

Advocate General

Tizzano

Language(s) of the Case

  • German

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • Italian