BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you
consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it
will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free
access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[New search]
[Printable RTF version]
[Help]
Roches Stores Dublin Ltd [1993] IECA 37 (5th October, 1993)
COMPETITION
AUTHORITY
Competition
Authority Decision of 5 October 1993 relating to a proceeding under Section 4
of the Competition Act, l99l.
Notification
No: CA/1016/92E - Roches Stores Dublin Limited/Peter Mark.
Decision
No: 37
Price
£0.30
£0.70 incl. postage.
Notification
No CA/1016/92E -Roches Stores Dublin Limited/Peter Mark
Decision
No: 37
Introduction
1. Notification
was made on 30 September, l992 by Peter Mark with a request for a certificate
under Section 4(4) of The Competition Act, l99l or, in the event of a refusal
by the Competition Authority to issue a certificate, a licence under Section
4(2), in respect of a lease between Roches Stores Dublin Limited and Peter Mark.
The
Facts
(a) The
subject of the notification
2. The
notification concerns the lease of a shop unit,Unit 1, Frascati Shopping
Centre, Blackrock, Co Dublin, between Roches Stores Dublin Limited as landlord
and Peter Mark as tenant.
(b) The
parties involved
3. Roches
Stores Dublin Limited trades as a supermarket and department store and is
engaged in the letting of shop units at Frascati Shopping Centre. Peter Mark
trades as a hairdresser with approximately 48 outlets in the State including
the salon at Frascati Shopping Centre.
4. The
notified shopping centre lease was made on 25 November 1989 for a period of 30
years from 1 September 1989. The restricted user clauses in the lease are as
follows:-
(a) In
clause 4.11.2 the tenant covenants with the landlord
"Not
without the prior consent in writing of the Landlord or its Agency thereunto
lawfully authorised to use or to permit or suffer or allow the Demised Premises
or any part or parts thereof to be used for any purposes other than as a retail
shop for the Permitted business and for no other purpose or purposes whatsoever
..................
PROVIDED
ALWAYS AND IT IS HEREBY AGREED AND DECLARED
that upon any application by the Tenant or any authorised under-tenant of the
Tenant for liberty to alter or change the Permitted Business the Landlord shall
not unreasonably withhold its consent to such proposed change of user....."
Clause
l defines "the Permitted Business" as "The retail trade or business of Ladies
& Gents Hairdressing Salon, and for the sale of beauty products and for
carrying out beauty treatment including sunray treatment and as a Solarium."
(b) In
Clause 4.25.1 the tenant covenants with the landlord "Not to assign, transfer,
underlet, ......or part with the possession or occupation of the Demised
Premises or any part thereof or ........as concessionaire
BUT
SO THAT NOTWITHSTANDING
the foregoing the Landlord shall not unreasonably withhold its consent to an
assignment, transfer under-letting, charging, mortgaging or encumbering of the
entire of the Demised Premises ......".
In
addition there are a number of other standard restrictive covenants and
obligations in the lease.
Peter
Mark has also advised that by way of side letter the Landlord has given a
commitment that no one trade would be over represented at the centre and where
possible only a single shop unit in the centre would be used for a single trade.
Assessment
- The Applicability of Section 4 (1)
5. The
Authority considers that Roches Stores Dublin Limited and Peter Mark are
undertakings and that the notified lease is an agreement between undertakings.
The agreement has effect within the State.
6. The
Authority considers that the notified agreement, and its restricted and
exclusive user clauses and the other restrictive clauses and obligations, does
not have the object or effect of preventing, restricting or distorting
competition in trade in any goods or services in the State or in any part of
the State, for the reasons given in the Notice of the Authority of 2 September
1993 in respect of shopping centre leases (Iris Oifigiuil 10 September 1993,
pp. 665-667). The Authority therefore considers that the notified agreement
between Roches Stores Dublin Limited and Peter Mark, does not offend against
Section 4 (1) of the Competition Act l99l.
The
Certificate
7. The
Competition Authority has issued the following certificate.
The
Competition Authority certifies that in its opinion, on the basis of the facts
in its possession, the agreement between Roches Stores Dublin Limited and
Peter Mark in relation to the lease of a premises at Unit, 1 Frascati Shopping
Centre, Blackrock, Co Dublin, notified under Section 7 on 30 September, 1992
(notification no. CA/1016/92E), does not offend against Section 4 (1) of the
Competition Act, l99l.
For
the Competition Authority
Des
Wall
Member
5
October, 1993.
© 1993 Irish Competition Authority
BAILII:
Copyright Policy |
Disclaimers |
Privacy Policy |
Feedback |
Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IECompA/1993/37.html