Irish Competition Authority Decisions
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
Irish Competition Authority Decisions >>
An Post/Ascom Hasler Mailing Systems Ltd/Zurich Insurance Company. [1995] IECA 451 (18th December, 1995)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IECompA/1995/451.html
Cite as:
[1995] IECA 451
[
New search]
[
Printable RTF version]
[
Help]
An Post/Ascom Hasler Mailing Systems Ltd/Zurich Insurance Company. [1995] IECA 451 (18th December, 1995)
Competition
Authority decision of 18 December 1995 relating to a proceeding under Section 4
of the Competition Act, 1991.
Notification
No. CA/16/95 - An Post / Ascom Hasler Mailing Systems Limited / Zurich
Insurance Company
Decision
No. 451
Introduction
1. This
decision concerns an agreement dated 24 January 1994 between,
Ascom
Hasler Mailing Systems Limited (Ascom), Zurich Insurance Company (Zurich) and
An Post setting out the conditions under which An Post will allow Ascom Hasler
to supply franking machines to the Irish market. The agreement was notified to
the Authority on 11 May 1995 with a request for a certificate under Section
4(4) or, in the event of a refusal by the Authority to issue a certificate, a
licence under
Section 4(2) of the
Competition Act, 1991.
The
Facts
(a) The
subject of the notification
2. This
notification concerns an agreement ´as to the use of franking machines',
dated 24 January 1990 between
Ascom,
Zurich (the surety) and An Post. The agreement sets out the conditions under
which An Post will allow Ascom to supply postage franking machines to users in
the Irish market.
(b) The
Parties
3. An
Post is the national postal authority which has a statutory monopoly in respect
of the provision of postal services by virtue of the Postal and
Telecommunications Act 1983. In addition to providing postal services it also
operates money transmission services and provides agency services for
Government Departments, An Post National Lottery Company, Telecom Eireann and
other bodies. The company's turnover in 1994 was £288.8m and it recorded
a profit of £10.8m. Ascom is a limited company based in Berne,
Switzerland and is a supplier of mailing systems and services. Zurich is an
insurance company which is also based in Switzerland.
(c) The
product and the market
4. The
market concerned is that for the supply of franking machines to various
businesses and institutions throughout the country, which use the machines for
affixing postage marks on envelopes, parcels and packages, thus denoting
prepayment of postage. As described in the Authority's decision in respect of
the standard licence agreement between An Post and users of franking machines,
such machines are a means whereby users pay An Post for postal services.
Franking machines represent an alternative to purchasing stamps directly from
post offices. In addition it is possible, in the case of parcels, for firms to
use firms other than An Post to provide delivery services. Franking machines
are generally purchased, leased or rented from authorised suppliers to users.
The market is that for franking machines.
5.
Firms must obtain a licence from An Post before they can use a franking
machine and suppliers must be approved by An Post. There are currently three
authorised suppliers of franking machines in the Irish market, Ascom, Pitney
Bowes and Neopost. Agreements with the other two companies are the subject of
separate decisions. They supply to customers largely in the business sector.
Each supplier has an authorised agent in Ireland for supply, distribution and
maintenance of their equipment. Ascom's agent is Dualtron Limited. There are
approximately 10,000 franking machines in Ireland at present. The franking
machine is of no value to the customer without the licence (except in a case of
fraudulent use), because the customer cannot obtain an initial or new supply of
postage from An Post.
6. According
to the parties approximately 1,000 machines are supplied to the market each
year. Ascom has supplied [ ] of those presently in use and has approximately a
[ ]% share of the market for franking machines in Ireland.
(d) The
arrangements
7. The
notified arrangements concern an agreement between An Post, Ascom and Zurich
whereby An Post agrees to permit the use, as licenced postal franking machines
by authorised persons, certain postal franking machines including meters and
dies to be supplied by or on behalf of Ascom Hasler. Zurich is involved in the
agreement for the purpose of providing a guarantee to An Post for the
obligations of Ascom under the agreement. The agreement sets out the conditions
under which An Post will allow Ascom to operate as a supplier to the Irish
market.
8. Clause
1 of the agreement provides that Ascom shall not, without the consent of An
Post, appoint any person as distributor or maintainer of franking machines in
the State. Clause 2 provides that any equipment to be supplied by Ascom must
be of a type approved by An Post. Any person to whom a franking machine is
supplied must be the holder of a licence from An Post in respect of it.
Clause 4 provides for minimum maintenance standards which must be complied with
by every customer. Clause 5 provides that repairs to sealed parts of a
franking machine may take place only with the consent of An Post. Clause 6
provides that Ascom shall retain legal ownership of Ascom dies supplied to
customers. Clause 10 provides that Ascom may not supply any equipment except
on such terms approved by An Post. Clause 12 imposes a liability on Ascom
(subject to a maximum for one case of misuse and in each twelve monthly period)
to indemnify An Post in respect of loss of revenue due to misuse of a franking
machine as a result of negligence on the part of Ascom.
(e) Submissions
of the Parties
9. An
Post submitted that they place no restrictions on the number of suppliers who
may supply franking machines to the Irish market. They stated that clause 10,
which required the approval of An Post for the terms on which Ascom supplies
any equipment, did not relate to sale, hire, rental or lease charges, with
which An Post was not concerned. They also submitted some arguments in support
of their request for a licence these are not considered here.
Assessment
(a) Section
4(1)
10.
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
11.
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'. An Post is a body corporate which is engaged for gain in the supply
of postal and other services to the public. Ascom is a Swiss company which is
engaged for gain in the provision of mailing systems and services. Zurich which
is also based in Switzerland is engaged for gain in the insurance business.
Therefore the parties to the agreement are undertakings and the notified
arrangements constitute an agreement between undertakings.
(c)
Applicability of Section 4(1)
12. This
agreement concerns the authorization of Ascom by An Post to supply postal
franking machines to users in the Irish market. At present there are three
licensed suppliers of franking machines to customers in Ireland. An Post has
stated that it does not restrict the number of suppliers who may supply
machines to the Irish market and that it would enter into a similar agreement
with any reputable supplier of franking machines.
13. The
equipment may only be supplied to firms licensed by An Post. An Post also
requires that the machines be serviced and maintained by the supplier or the
agent or distributor and that they must be returned to the supplier in the
event that An Post terminates the user's licence. Essentially the machines are
a means whereby users pay An Post for using its postal services. The Authority
believes that such restrictions are simply entended to prevent fraudulent use
of the equipment to the detriment of An Post. The only legitimate use for such
equipment is to produce postage labels which are affixed on packages sent
through the An Post postal service. In the event that there were competing
suppliers of postal services, the position might be different, in that it might
prevent competitors from offering customers the option of using franking
machines. Given the statutory monopoly in respect of postal services conferred
on An Post, this does not arise. The Authority does not consider that the
agreement is anti-competitive.
14. The
terms of the agreement do not include any provisions which prevent, restrict or
distort competition. The restrictions on Ascom in relation to the appointment
of agents, supply and repairs to machines and supply and approval of equipment,
are necessary in order to protect against fraudulent use of the machines and
also to ensure the accuracy, efficiency and reliability of the system. The
provisions could be used to restrict competition, in which case they would
offend against
Section 4(1). There is no indication that they have been used
in this way. Ascom is not restricted by An Post in respect of its charges to
customers. Therefore the agreement does not have the object or the effect of
preventing, restricting or distorting competition in the State and does not
offend against
Section 4(1).
The
Decision
15. In
the Authority's opinion, An Post, Ascom and Zurich are undertakings within the
meaning of
Section 3(1) of the
Competition Act, 1991 and the notified
arrangements constitute agreements between undertakings. In the Authority's
opinion the agreement of 24 January 1994 between the above parties, as to the
supply of franking machines to customers of An Post for denoting prepayment of
postage does not have as its object or effect, the prevention, restriction or
distortion of competition and does not offend against
Section 4(1).
The
Certificate
16. The
Competition Authority has issued the following certificate:
1. The
Competition Authority certifies that in its opinion, on the basis of the facts
in its possession, the agreement of 24 January 1994 between An Post, Ascom
Hasler Mailing Systems Ltd and Zurich Insurance Company as to the use of
franking machines for denoting prepayment of postage (notification no.
CA/16/95), notified on 11 May 1995 under Section 7, does not offend against
Section 4(1) of the Competition Act, 1991.
2. For
the Competition Authority
Member
18
December 1995.
© 1995 Irish Competition Authority