The UK Court of Appeal holds that beer distribution agreements containing ties were contrary to Article 101.1 TFEU and upholds an appeal for damages (Crehan)

In this well-known case, published for the seek of completness (See J. Derenne and T. Seidenspinner, “The English Court of appeal applies Art. 81 EC and award damages for breach of EC law (Crehan)”, e-Competitions, April 2005, n° 204) , the claimant, Mr. B. Crehan, appealed against the judgment handed down at first instance by Park J dismissing the claim for damages for breach of Art. 81(1) EC he brought against the defendant, Inntrepreneur Pub Company (hereinafter “IPC”). The facts of the case at hand were as follows. IPC was a holding company created by Grand Metropolitan, a brewer, and Courage Ltd, a major pub owner, following the elaboration of two British statutory instruments designed to put an end to monopoly situations in the supply of beer for retail purposes on licensed

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • London School of Economics (London)

Quotation

Orla Lynskey, The UK Court of Appeal holds that beer distribution agreements containing ties were contrary to Article 101.1 TFEU and upholds an appeal for damages (Crehan), 21 May 2004, e-Competitions May 2004, Art. N° 345

Visites 6525

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues