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]
Ipodec Ordures Usines S.A./GKN United Kingdom plc [1994] IECA 342 (14th June, 1994)
Competition
Authority decision of 14 June 1994 relating to a proceeding under Section 4 of
the Competition Act, 1991
Notification
No. CA/296/92E - Ipodec Ordures Usines S.A./GKN United Kingdom plc
Decision
No. 342
Introduction
1. An
agreement between Ipodec Ordures Usines S.A. (Ipodec) and GKN United Kingdom
plc (GKN) and Brambles Industries Limited (Brambles) for the purchase and sale
of the entire issued share capital of Frogmore Limited (Frogmore), Cleanaway
Ireland Limited (Cleanaway) and O'Brien Waste Disposal Limited (O'Brien's)
(collectively the Subsidiaries) containing a non-compete clause, was notified
to the Competition Authority on 30 September 1992. The notification requested
a certificate or, in the event of a certificate being refused, a licence. The
Authority issued a Statement of Objections on 28 March 1994.
The
Facts
(a) The
Subject of the Notification
2. The
notification relates to an agreement dated 5 December 1990 between GKN and
Brambles (collectively the Vendors) and Ipodec whereby the Vendors agreed to
sell the entire issued share capital of the Subsidiaries to Ipodec. The
agreement also contained a non-compete provision.
(b) The
Parties
3. Ipodec
is a limited company with registered offices in France. GKN and Brambles are
limited companies registered in England and Australia respectively. Frogmore,
Cleanaway and O'Brien's are all limited companies incorporated in the State
engaged in the waste disposal business.
(c) The
Arrangements
4. The
notification relates to an agreement, dated 5 December 1990, for the sale by
the Vendors of the entire share capital of the Subsidiaries to Ipodec. Clause
8.1 of the agreement has the effect of preventing the vendors from competing in
the waste disposal business within the State for a period of five years from
the date of the agreement. Clause 8.2 prevents the vendors, for the same
period, from endeavouring to solicit or obtain the custom of any person who was
a customer of the subsidiaries in the 12 months preceding the date of the
agreement or from soliciting staff of the purchaser. These non-compete
provisions do not prevent the vendors and Cleanaway from continuing to carry on
business relating to PCB.
(d) Subsequent
Developments
5. The
Authority wrote to the parties on 13 July 1993 expressing concerns at the
excessive duration of the non-compete clauses. Solicitors for the parties
indicated, by letter dated 15 July 1993, that they were awaiting instructions
from their clients on the matter and that they would revert to the Authority in
due course. The Authority then issued a Statement of Objections to both
parties on 28 March 1994 stating that it intended to refuse a certificate or
licence and offering them 28 days to respond to its objections. They were also
offered the opportunity of an oral hearing. On 18 April 1994, solicitors
representing Ipodec wrote to the Authority stating that their client did not
intend to take any further action in this matter. On 22 April 1994, GKN
replied stating that they had no objections to the Authority's assessment.
They confirmed that the arrangements did not involve a transfer of technical
know-how. They indicated they would like an oral hearing if Ipodec sought one.
Assessment
(a) Section
4(1)
6. Section
4(1) of the Competition Act states that 'all agreements between undertakings,
decisions by associations of undertakings and concerted practices which have as
their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition
in trade in any goods or services in the State or in any part of the State are
prohibited and void'.
(b) The
Undertakings and the Agreement
7. Section
3(1) of the Competition Act defines an undertaking as ´a person being an
individual, a body corporate or an unincorporated body of persons engaged for
gain in the production, supply or distribution of goods or the provision of a
service.' Ipodec, GKN and Brambles are corporate bodies engaged for gain in
the waste disposal business and are, therefore, undertakings within the meaning
of the Act. The arrangements therefore constitute an agreement between
undertakings.
(c) Applicability
of Section 4(1)
Sale
of Business
8. As
the sale of business was completed prior to 1 October, 1991, the date on which
the Competition Act came into force, this element of the agreement had been
discharged by performance before the Act commenced. The property which was the
subject of the agreement had been transferred. In the Authority's view, the
prohibition in Section 4(1) only applies to a current or continuing contractual
commitment or one entered into subsequent to the coming into force of the Act
[1].
As the merger or sale element of the 1991 transaction was discharged prior to
the commencement of the Act, that aspect of the arrangements does not come
within the scope of Section 4(1).
Non-Competition
Clause
9. The
agreement contained a five-year non-compete clause from the date of the
agreement, 5 December 1990. Clause 8.1 of the agreement has the effect of
preventing the vendors from competing in the waste disposal business within the
State for a period of five years from the date of the agreement. Clause 8.2
prevents the vendors from endeavouring to solicit or obtain the custom of any
person who was a customer of the subsidiaries in the 12 months preceding the
date of the agreement or from soliciting staff of the purchaser. Both of the
restrictions in clause 8.2 also apply for a five year period commencing on 5
December 1990. The Authority has indicated in a number of previous decisions
that it generally considers a non-compete period of two years as being
sufficient to ensure the complete transfer of goodwill in a sale of business
agreement. This can be extended to five years where the sale involves the
transfer of technical know-how. However, the Authority does not believe, on
this occasion, that the notified arrangements contain any degree of technical
know-how. The duration of the non-compete period is therefore in excess what
the Authority considers sufficient for the complete transfer of goodwill. The
parties have not advanced any reason for such a lengthy period in this
instance. In the Authority's opinion, the arrangements offend against section
4(1).
(d) Applicability
of Section 4(2)
10. Under
Section 4(2), the Competition Authority may grant a licence in the case of any
agreement or category of agreements which offend against Section 4(1) but
which, ´having regard to all relevant market conditions, contributes to
improving the production of goods or provision of services or to promoting
technical or economic progress, while allowing consumers a fair share of the
resulting benefit and which does not -
(i) impose
on the undertakings concerned terms which are not indispensable to the
attainment of those objectives;
(ii) afford
undertakings the possibility of eliminating competition in respect of a
substantial part of the products or services in question.'
11. The
Authority has stated in a number of previous decisions
[2]
that where the duration of the non-compete provisions of an agreement is found
to exceed what is necessary to secure the transfer of the goodwill of the
business, it cannot be regarded as being indispensable to the agreement. As
all four of the requirements for a licence under section 4(2) of the
Competition Act are not satisfied, the agreement cannot be granted a licence.
The
Decision
12. In
the Authority's opinion, Ipodec Ordures Usines S.A., GKN United Kingdom plc,
and Brambles Industries Limited are undertakings within the meaning of Section
3(1) of the Competition Act, and the notified arrangements for the acquisition
of Frogmore Limited, Cleanaway Ireland Limited and O'Brien Waste Disposal
Limited constitute an agreement between undertakings. For the reasons given
above, the Authority believes that the arrangements have the effect of
preventing, restricting and distorting competition. The agreement of 5
December 1990 between Ipodec and the Vendors for the purchase and sale of the
entire issued share capital of the subsidiaries offends against
Section 4(1) of
the
Competition Act, 1991 and does not satisfy the conditions necessary for the
grant of a licence under
section 4(2). Consequently, the Authority refuses a
certificate or licence in respect of the agreement between Ipodec Ordures
Usines S.A., GKN United Kingdom plc and Brambles Industries Limited for the
purchase and sale of the entire issued share capital of Frogmore Limited,
Cleanaway Ireland Limited and O'Brien Waste Disposal Limited, notified to the
Competition Authority on 30 September 1992 under
section 7 of the
Competition
Act.
For
the Competition Authority
Patrick
Massey
Member
14
June 1994
[ ] 1 'Notice
in respect of Mergers and Takeovers which predate the Competition Act' -
Competition Authority, Iris Oifigiuil, 14 May 1993.
[ ]2 See
for example decision No. 10, GI Corporation/General Semiconductor, 23 October
1992.
© 1994 Irish Competition Authority
BAILII:
Copyright Policy |
Disclaimers |
Privacy Policy |
Feedback |
Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IECompA/1994/342.html