Irish Competition Authority Decisions
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
Irish Competition Authority Decisions >>
Shamrock/Brookline [1993] IECA 32 (9th September, 1993)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IECompA/1993/32.html
Cite as:
[1993] IECA 32
[
New search]
[
Printable RTF version]
[
Help]
Shamrock/Brookline [1993] IECA 32 (9th September, 1993)
Notification
No. CA/694/92E - Shamrock Foods Limited/Brookline Limited
Decision
No. 32
Introduction
1. An
agreement between Brookline Limited (Brookline) and Whitworth Holdings Limited
(Whitworths), an English-based company, for the purchase and sale of Shamrock
Foods Limited (Shamrock Foods) and Shamrock Foods (Distributors) Limited
(Shamrock Distributors) 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
Facts
(a) The
Subject of the Notification
2.
The
notification relates to an agreement dated 13 October 1989 between Whitworth
and Brookline whereby the Whitworth Group agrees to sell its 75% interest in
Shamrock Foods and 100% interest in Shamrock Distributors to Brookline. The
agreement also contains a non-compete provision.
(b) The
Parties
3. Shamrock
Foods and Shamrock Distributors are limited companies incorporated in the
State. Shamrock Foods was 75% owned and Shamrock Distributors wholly-owned, by
Whitworths. Whitworths is an English-registered company based in Northampton.
Brookline
is a limited company registered in the State. It is jointly-owned by Mr. John
Francis Deignan, Mr. Sean Patrick Deignan (the Deignans) and IAWS Group plc
(IAWS).
(c) The
Arrangements
4. The
notification relates to an agreement, dated 13 October 1989, for the sale of
Whitworth's interest in Shamrock Foods and Shamrock Distributors to Brookline.
Clause 9.1 of the agreement prevents the vendors from becoming involved in a
competing business for a period of three years from the date of completion. In
addition, clause 9.3.1 provides that in the event of the Whitworth Group
acquiring at least a 20% interest in a company which competed with Brookline,
it was obliged to offer that interest for sale to Brookline. The parties
indicated by letter dated 5 July 1993 that it was intended that this clause be
of the same duration as that contained in clause 9.1. The three-year period
expired on 13 October 1992.
Assessment
(a) Section
4(1)
5. 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
6. 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.' Both Brookline and Whitworths are corporate bodies engaged for gain
and are, therefore, undertakings.
(c) Applicability
of Section 4(1)
7. 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).
8. The
agreement contained a three-year non-compete clause. In the Authority's
opinion, this did not have the object or effect of preventing, restricting or
distorting competition.
The
Decision
9. In
the Authority's opinion, Whitworths Holdings Limited and Brookline Limited are
undertakings within the meaning of Section 3(1) of the Competition Act, and the
notified arrangements for the purchase and sale of Shamrock Foods Limited and
Shamrock Foods (Distributors) Limited constitute an agreement between
undertakings.
10. The
Authority believes that as the sale element of the transaction was discharged
prior to the commencement of the Competition Act, the agreement for the
purchase and sale of Shamrock Foods Limited and Shamrock Foods (Distributors)
Limited does not come within the scope of Section 4(1) of the Act. The
non-compete clause was ancillary to the main agreement and did not offend
against section 4(1).
The
Certificate
11. The
Competition Authority has issued the following decision:
The
Competition Authority certifies that in its opinion, on the basis of the facts
in its possession, the agreement between Whitworths Holdings Limited and
Brookline Limited for the purchase and sale of Shamrock Foods Limited and
Shamrock Foods (Distributors) Limited (notification no. CA/694/92E), notified
on 30 September 1992 under Section 7, did not offend against
Section 4(1) of
the
Competition Act, 1991, during the period in which it operated.
For
the Competition Authority
Patrick
Massey
Member
9
September 1993
[ ] 1 'Notice
in respect of Mergers and Takeovers which predate the Competition Act' -
Competition Authority
© 1993 Irish Competition Authority