Skip to content

Block Exemption Vertical Agreements 2010

(1) In accordance with Article 101, paragraph 3, of the Treaty and subject to the provisions of this Regulation, it is stated that Article 101, paragraph 1, of the Treaty does not apply to vertical agreements. 2. The exemption in paragraph 1 applies to vertical agreements between a business association and its members or between such an association and its suppliers only if all its members are retailers of goods and no member of the association has a total annual turnover of more than 50 million euros with its related companies. The vertical agreements concluded by these associations fall within the scope of this regulation, without prejudice to the application of Article 101 of the treaty to horizontal agreements concluded between the members of the association or by the association. Companies involved in the marketing of goods or services in the EU will want to examine the impact of the new BER on their existing agreements, for example the impact of the new threshold applicable to the buyer`s market share. The BER applies only if the market share threshold is reached. Companies must constantly monitor their supply chains to ensure that the threshold is not exceeded. 4. The exemption in paragraph 1 does not apply to vertical agreements between competing companies. However, it applies when competing companies enter into a non-reciprocal vertical agreement and: in addition to long-standing debates such as this one, the growth of e-commerce platforms and online platforms has raised new issues related to vertical agreements over the past decade.

In particular, online platforms have become a major player in e-commerce and play roles ranging from providing information and retail sales to operating marketplaces facilitating transactions between third-party buyers and sellers. Examples include Airbnb, Amazon, Expedia, Idealo, TaskRabbit, VBO, Volagratis and USwitch. The Commission`s Regulation 330/2010 (Articles 2 and 3) of the Commission provides for conditions for exemption from Article 101 if there is sufficient certainty that the agreements meet the conditions of Article 101, paragraph 3. The VBER also lists vertical agreements that are considered “hardcore” offences and therefore do not benefit from the VBER. “competing company,” a real or potential competitor; “effective competitor,” a company operating in the same market; a “potential competitor”, an obligation which, in the absence of the vertical agreement, would be likely, for realistic and not only theoretical reasons, to realize, in a short period of time, the additional investments or other conversion costs necessary to enter the market in question in the event of a minor but lasting increase in relative prices; The new guidelines for horizontal cooperation agreements contain a number of expanded sections that provide more detail and clarity than existing guidelines. An example of this is the chapter on standardization agreements (in which the parties define the technical standards and quality requirements that must be met by future products or services) which now covers the issue of standard conditions in the industry, in which several competitors agree to use the same standard conditions with their respective customers (for example. B standard TS-C in the banking and insurance sector).