Irish Competition Authority Decisions
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
Irish Competition Authority Decisions >>
Bewley's Coffee Machines 2 [1996] IECA 473 (12th December, 1996)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IECompA/1996/473.html
Cite as:
[1996] IECA 473
[
New search]
[
Printable RTF version]
[
Help]
Bewley's Coffee Machines 2 [1996] IECA 473 (12th December, 1996)
COMPETITION
AUTHORITY
Competition
Authority Decision of 12 December, 1996 relating to a proceeding under Section
4 of the Competition Act, 1991.
Notification
No CA/833/92E - Bewleys Coffee Machines 2.
Decision
No. 473
Price
£0.70
(£1.10 incl. postage)
Notification
no. CA/833/92E - Bewleys Coffee Machines 2.
Decision
no. 473
Introduction
1. This
decision involves a standard loan agreement relating to the use of Bewleys
coffee machines by caterers, etc. The agreement was notified on 30 September,
1992 by Bewleys Coffee Ltd with a request for a certificate under
Section 4 (4)
of the
Competition Act, 1991 or, in the event of a refusal by the Competition
Authority to grant a certificate, a licence under
Section 4 (2).
The
Facts
(a)
The subject of the Notification
2. The
notification concerns a standard coffee machine loan agreement between Bewleys
Coffee Ltd, the owner and supplier of the coffee machines, leased out by the
company to various customers in the catering industry and also for the
provision of coffee for use in those machines. In effect this agreement
relates to 'medium and large' coffee machines, while a separate agreement
relating to small machines was the subject of a separate notification.
(b)
The parties involved
3. Bewleys
Coffee Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Campbell Bewley Group Ltd. The
Group is involved in various businesses including contract catering, the
operation of retail shops and cafes and in the wholesale supply of coffee, tea,
and speciality breads and confectionery. Bewleys cafes were first opened in
1840 and now there are 21 Bewleys cafes, five of which are owned by the Group
and the rest are franchisees using the Bewley’s name. The Group also has
a “Coffeeman” franchise in the U.K. which operates as suppliers of
coffee and dispensers to restaurants and offices. The Group is also involved
in three joint ventures, one with Aer Rianta to operate a catering business,
one with Butlers Irish Chocolates and one to market Bewleys Irish Creme liquer
in the USA. It had other catering contracts abroad in the Middle East. Bewleys
Hotel, a 70 bed hotel was recently opened by the Group. The services division
of the Group is responsible for the retail and catering contracts and accounts
for four fifths of its turnover. The products division oversees the wholesale
coffee and tea business, accounting for the balance of the Group’s
turnover. The turnover for the Campbell Bewley Group for the year ending
December 1994 was £55m. The other parties to this standard agreement are
the hundreds of customers in the catering industry such as cafes, hotels, pubs,
restaurants, offices and shops.
(c)
The products and the market
4. The
products involved in this notification are coffee machines for use in the
catering business such as cafes, pubs, restaurants, hotels, offices and shops
and the supply of ground coffee for use in those machines. There are a number
of other suppliers of machines and ground coffee operating in the market
including Robert Roberts, Douwe Egberts, Melita and Johnson Bros. as well as a
number of smaller suppliers. New suppliers can enter this market easily as the
cost of the machines is not prohibitive and supplies can be obtained both
within the State and from outside. While there are different brands of ground
coffee competing with each other and acting as substitutes for each other, the
caterer who enters a loan agreement for the use of a specific coffee machine is
restricted to using the brand of ground coffee supplied by the company that
owns the machine, for use in that particular machine. The average order per
month for customers with the medium sized machines is 2.5 cases (or 30 per
year) and the average order per month for customers with the larger machines is
7 cases per month (or 84 per year).
5. The
market in this case is that of the supply of coffee machines and ground coffee
for use by the catering trade in the State. Bewleys have estimated that their
share of the market for roast and ground coffee, (that is all catering outlets
that sell roast and ground coffee and not just outlets that have machines
provided by a supplier on similar terms, but relates to all ground and roast
coffee consumed away from home), is [ ]%, Robert Roberts is [ ]% and that
Douwe Egberts, Melita and Johnson Bros. together have [ ]%. The share held by
other competitors in this market is said to be insignificant. Bewley’s
estimated their share of the entire market for catering coffee (including
roast, ground and instant catering coffee) to be [ ]%. Bewleys have also
estimated their turnover from the relevant market as £[ ] million,
Robert Roberts as £[ ] million and Douwe Egberts, Melita and Johnson
Bros. together as £[ ] million in 1991. According to the Annual
Services Inquiry
[1]
for 1991 there were 6,450 public houses and off-licences, 1,050 hotels and
guesthouses and 1,292 restaurants and cafes operating within the State.
Bewley’s stated that they have agreements with approximately 2,600 users
for their various types of coffee makers.
(d)
The agreement
6. The
agreement is a standard loan agreement for the supply of (medium and large)
coffee machines to customers in the catering industry and for the exclusive use
of Bewleys ground coffee in those machines. The coffee machines remain the
property of Bewleys. The customers also agree to purchase a
specified
minimum amount of coffee - an average of 2.5 cases per month or 30 per annum
for medium sized machines and 7 cases per month or 84 per year for larger
machines - from the company. Each case of coffee contains 5 kilograms and this
yields between 480 and 720 five fluid ounce cups depending on the strength of
the coffee required by the customer. Under the agreement the customer is
prevented from using any other brand of coffee, except those supplied by
Bewleys, in their machines. The machines must be insured by the customers for
a specified amount while on their premises, Bewleys will install, test and
service the equipment. The payment term specified is [ ] days. If the
premises changes ownership, then the customer is required to inform the
supplier in advance. Clause 9 of the agreement provides for a duration for the
agreement. However, in practice, Bewleys do not insist on compliance with this
provision with the result that its customers are not required to take the
machines for any minimum or maximum period. The agreement can be terminated by
the supplier without notice if the company is wound up, goes into liquidation,
an order is made against the goods of the customer, etc. then the supplier has
the right to enter the premises and repossess the equipment. Bewleys has
concluded agreements with hundreds of customers [ ] for the medium and
larger coffee machines and ground coffee and they expect to conclude agreements
with many other customers in the future. The cost of the coffee machines to the
company is £[ ] for the medium one and £[ ] for the larger
machine.
(e)
Submissions of the parties
7. Bewleys
submitted, in support of their request for a certificate, that the arrangements
did not have the object or efect of preventing, restricting or distorting
competition since the agreement did not foreclose competition as the customer
was free to terminate the agreement at any time and enter into a similar
arrangement with another supplier. In particular, in respect of the agreement
for the larger machines, the practice was that the provisions of clause 9 were
not completed. Bewleys did not require its customers to take the machines for
any fixed period of time. If a customer requested them to remove the machine
supplied by them, they would do so immediately. They asserted that the
restriction only applied to the use by the customer of Bewleys coffee in
Bewleys machines, which were supplied to the customers free of charge. The
customer was free to use other brands of coffee in its business, but not in the
equipment supplied by the company. They maintained that there was strong
competition in the market for the goods and services provided. Bewley's stated
that they were not rigid in their application of the minimum purchase
requirement for supplies of coffee and they said that they would look at a
purchaser's orders over a twelve month period. The level of the minimum order
was dependent upon the size of the coffee machine and the minimum purchase
order was calculated by reference to the cost of the machine. They also
maintained that they would generally continue with an arrangement where a
customer had complied substantially with the minimum purchase requirement.
Bewley's also supply ground coffee to customers who do not have an agreement
with the company and who own or lease their their own machines (other than from
Bewleys).
8. They
submitted that the provisions of EC regulation 1984/83 applied to the
restrictions contained in the agreement, since only two undertakings were
involved, the re-seller agreed to purchase certain specified goods for resale
from the supplier, the re-seller undertook to purchase minimum quantities of
the goods and the agreement was of short-term duration in that it was
terminable by the purchaser merely by ceasing to order the goods from Bewleys
and returning the equipment.
Assessment
(a)
Section 4(1)
9.
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
10.
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.' Bewleys Coffee Ltd is engaged
inter
alia
for gain in the business of the roasting, blending and packaging of coffee for
supply to the catering trade and retail outlets. The other parties include
cafes, pubs, restaurants, etc. who are engaged for gain primarily in the
catering industry. Consequently, they are all undertakings within the meaning
of
Section 3(1) of the
Competition Act. The agreement is therefore an agreement
between undertakings.
(c)
Applicability of Section 4(1)
11. The
notified agreement constitutes a standard agreement for the loan of equipment,
namely a coffee machine, from the supplier to the customer for use in the
catering trade. The supplier has many hundreds[ ] of such agreements. As
part of this agreement, the customer is required to purchase a minimum quantity
of one of the supplier's products, that is 2.5 cases for medium sized machines
and 7 cases for the larger machines of ground coffee, for use with the coffee
machine. No other brand of coffee can be used with the coffee machine provided
by the supplier except the supplier's own brand of ground coffee. The supplier
has provided the equipment at no charge to the customer as part of the
arrangements. The customer is not prevented from selling other brands of coffee
from their premises, provided the supplier's equipment is not used for this
purpose. The clause (9) relating to the duration of the term of the agreement
was usually not completed, but the notifying party has stated that the
agreement can be terminated at any time by the customer. They also claimed that
the EC Regulation No. 1984/83 applied to the arrangements, but the Authority
does not accept this claim since the product purchased from the supplier is not
re-sold as a product as such, but is re-sold for consumption on the premises of
the customer as part of a service.
12. The
primary purpose of the arrangements is to enable Bewleys to sell its ground
coffee, and simultaneously, the image/reputation of its product, to as many
catering premises as possible for onward sale to the public. Bewleys has
supplied a coffee machine to the caterer for this purpose at no charge and in
return, Bewley's requires the caterer to use only Bewley's brand of ground
coffee in this machine. This exclusivity requirement (clause 3), that only
Bewley’s coffee is used in Bewley’s coffee machine, is necessary to
guarantee that the coffee-consuming public is actually being served
Bewley’s coffee and not another competitor’s brand of coffee. This
provision cannot be viewed as being a restriction on competition since neither
Bewley’s nor the consumer could otherwise be certain that the coffee
being served is actually Bewley’s coffee, as claimed by the caterer, and
not some other brand. If an alternative brand of coffee of a lesser quality
was served from Bewley’s coffee machine, it would mean that the image and
reputation of Bewley’s coffee would be damaged as a result. The caterer
benefits from this arrangement by having a well-known quality coffee brand
available on their premises as part of their service. The objective of this
provision is to protect the image and reputation of the supplier’s
product and the supplier’s property and therefore it is not
anti-competitive.
13. The
exclusivity requirement does not prevent the caterer from purchasing and
serving any other brand of coffee from the premises, but is merely prevented
from using it in the coffee machine supplied by Bewley’s. If the caterer
is not satisfied with the arrangement with Bewley’s, then there are other
suppliers competing in this market who can offer an alternative option. The
cost of purchasing a coffee machine is not prohibitive and machines may also be
leased out from catering equipment suppliers. The agreements do not, in the
Authority’s opinion, result in the foreclosure of a significant segment
of the market. In Delimitis
[2]
the European Court of Justice held that exclusive purchase agreements should
not be regarded as anti-competitive unless they contributed to the foreclosure
of the market. In some cases, it might not be economical for the caterer to
have two coffee machines operating in the same premises. In general, however,
the relatively small size of the machines means that it would be relatively
easy for an outlet to install a second machine. Competition is not restricted
because the caterer is not tied to the agreement and can terminate it at any
time and acquire another coffee machine and another brand of coffee. In the
High Court in 1992, Justice Keane in his judgment in the Mars Ireland v. H.B.
Ice Cream
[3]
concluded that where a freezer cabinet had been provided free of charge to
retailers by H.B. for the storage of its products, H.B. were entitled to
prevent competitors from benefitting from the cabinet arrangements, which he
considered was an infringement of H.B.’s property rights.
14. The
caterer is also required to purchase a minimum quantity of the supplier's
product monthly. The level of the minimum order is dependent upon the size of
the coffee machine (an average of 2.5 cases per month for medium sized machines
and 7 cases per month for larger machines) and the minimum purchase order is
calculated by reference to the cost of the machine to Bewley's. The company
has stated that they do not stick rigidly to the specified quantity, but would
take the customer's previous record into account. There is no charge to the
caterer for the use/lease of the equipment from Bewley's, and the supplier
obtains a return on its investment, i.e. the coffee machines, in the form of
the (minimum) orders for its ground coffee it receives from its customers. This
minimum requirement is not prohibitive given the possibility that the caterer
can terminate the agreement at any time if dissatisfied with it. The minimum
monthly order for the medium sized machines would yield a maximum of 1,800 cups
of coffee and the minimum monthly order for the larger machines would yield a
maximum of 5,040 cups of coffee. This would appear to be a relatively small
amount for any catering establishment and so the minimum order would not appear
to exclude the likelihood of other brands of coffee being used in other machines.
15. Bewleys
maintain that they have [ ]% of the market for the consumption of roast and
ground coffee outside of the home and [ ]% of the market for all catering
coffee. The remainder of the market is comprised of Robert Roberts with [ ]%
and Douwe Egberts, Melita and Johnson Bros. together have [ ]%. Bewley’s
have [ ] agreements for the smaller coffee machines and [ ] for the
larger machines. Given that the numbers of public houses and off-licences were
6,450, hotels and guesthouses were 1,050 and restaurants and cafes were 1,292
in 1991
[4],
and assuming that these numbers may have increased since then, it is unclear
how Bewley’s estimated their share of this market. By its own reckoning,
Bewleys has three times the market share of its nearest competitor and three
times the market share of the next four competitors combined for ground and
roast coffee. While Bewleys may have a large share of this market, the
agreements cannot be taken as a restriction on competitors entering the market
since the terms of the standard agreement do not bind the caterers to
Bewley’s as they are free to terminate the agreement at any time.
Consequently, the arrangements do not prevent, restrict or distort competition
in the State and therefore do not offend against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition Act, 1991.
The
Decision
16. In
the opinion of the Authority, Bewleys Coffee Ltd and its customers in the
catering trade are undertakings within the meaning of
Section 3(1) the
Competition Act, 1991 and the notified coffee machine loan agreement is an
agreement between undertakings. In the Authority's opinion, the notified
agreement does not offend against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition Act, 1991.
The
Certificate
17. 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 coffee machine loan agreement between Bewleys Coffee Ltd
and its customers in the catering trade notified under
Section 7 (1) on 30
September, 1992 (notification no. CA/833/92E), does not offend against
Section
4 (1) of the
Competition Act, 1991.
For
the Competition Authority
Patrick
Massey
Member
12
December 1996.
[1]
Annual Services Inquiry, 1991, Retail, Wholesale, Hotels and Catering Sectors
published by the CSO, September 1994.
[2]
Decision of the Court of Justice of 28 February 1991 in the case of Stergios
Delimitis v Henniger Brau A.G. [1991] ECR 1-935.
[3]
Judgment of the High Court of 28 May 1992 - Masterfoods Ireland Ltd trading as
Mars Ireland v. H.B. Ice Creams Ltd; H.B. Ice Creams Ltd v. Masterfoods Ireland
Ltd trading as Mars Ireland.
[4]
Annual Services Inquiry, 1991.
© 1996 Irish Competition Authority