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]
Riga Ltd/Douglas Eyecare [1993] IECA 58 (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/240/92E - Riga Ltd/Douglas Eyecare Ltd
Decision
No: 58
Price
£0.30
£0.70 incl. postage.
Notification
No. CA/240/92E - Riga Ltd/Douglas Eyecare Ltd
Decision
No. 58
Introduction
1. Notification
was made by Douglas Eyecare Ltd on 30 September 1992 with a request for a
licence under
Section 4(2) of the
Competition Act, 1991, in respect of a lease
between Riga Ltd and Douglas Eyecare Ltd.
The
Facts
(a)
The subject of the notification
2. The
notification concerns the lease of a shop unit, Unit 21, at Douglas Shopping
Centre, Douglas, Co. Cork between Riga Ltd as landlord and Douglas Eyecare Ltd
as tenant.
(b)
The parties involved
3. Riga
Ltd is engaged in the business of letting shop units at Douglas Shopping
Centre. Douglas Eyecare Ltd trades as a retail optician, including dispensing
and the making of spectacles, lenses and ancillary items at Unit 21 Douglas
Shopping Centre.
(c) The
notified arrangements
4. The
notified shopping centre lease which is in draft form is for a term of 25 years
from 1 February 1992. The restricted user clauses in the lease are as follows:
(a) Under
clause 4.22 the tenant covenants
"Not
without the prior consent in writing of the Landlord or its Agents thereunder
lawfully authorised to use or permit or suffer or allow the Demised Premises or
any part or parts thereof to be used for any purpose other than as set forth in
Part II of the First Schedule hereto and for no other purpose or purposes
whatsoever......
Part
II of the First Schedule under the heading "Permitted User" reads "Retail
Opticians, including dispensing and making of spectacles, lenses and ancillary
items.
(b) Under
clause 4.23.2 the tenant covenants
"Not
at any time to use the Demised Premises or any part thereof or allow the same
to be used as a butcher shop or a greengrocers shop or as Building Society or
Bank or for the sale of food..."
(c) Under
clause 4.21 the tenant covenants with the landlord
"Not
to assign, transfer or underlet or part with or share the possession or
occupation of the Demised Premises or any part thereof or suffer any person to
occupy the Demised Premises or any part thereof as a licensee or as
concessionaire and in no circumstance or event to an assignee who would carry
on any business of a non-retail nature including Banks and Building societies
BUT
SO THAT NOTWITHSTANDING
the
foregoing the Landlord shall not unreasonably withhold its consent ...........
The
applicant has also indicated that the Landlord has agreed that, when letting
any of the other units in the property they will ensure that no other tenant
shall use their Unit for a similar use.
In
addition, there are a number of other standard restrictive covenants and
obligations in the lease.
Assessment
- The applicability of Section 4 (1)
5. The
Authority considers that Riga Ltd and Douglas Eyecare Ltd 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 standard 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 Riga Ltd and Douglas Eyecare Ltd does not offend
against
Section 4 (1) of the
Competition Act 1991.
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 Riga Ltd and Douglas Eyecare Ltd in
relation to the lease of the premises at Unit 21 Douglas Shopping Centre,
Douglas, Co. Cork notified under
Section 7 on 30 September 1992 (notification
no. CA/240/92E), does not offend against
Section 4 (1) of the
Competition Act,
1991.
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/1993/58.html