The following Competition practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
This Practice Note is important first stage reading for analysing vertical restraints, that is, restrictions in vertical agreements caught by Article 101(1) TFEU (see The prohibition on restrictive agreements) under competition law. It covers the European Commission’s vertical restraints policy, the circumstances in which a vertical restraint will not infringe competition law and specific current issues arising in relation to the application of competition law where the principles are not yet settled.
This Practice Note makes frequent references to two legal instruments issued by the Commission that are designed to assist parties and their advisors in determining the compatibility of their arrangements with Article 101 TFEU, namely the Vertical Restraints Block Exemption (VRBE, Regulation 330/2010) and the Commission Guidelines on Vertical Restraints.
See further, Competition law and exclusive distribution agreements, Competition law and selective distribution, Competition law and agency, Competition law and franchise agreements, The Vertical Restraints Block Exemption .
Agreements and practices which appreciably restrict competition fall into two broad categories:
high risk—anti-competitive agreements between competitors. Anti-competitive agreements between competitors are treated most severely under the competition rules. These are agreements made between companies at the same level in the supply chain (such as an agreement between two manufacturers of similar goods). They are commonly called ‘horizontal agreements’
agreements between companies operating at different levels in the
Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK
Complete all the fields above to proceed to the next step.
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
Take a free trial
Parent company guarantees (PCGs) in constructionIn the construction industry, parent company guarantees (PCGs) are commonly given to the employer by the main contractor’s holding company to guarantee the performance of the contract by the subsidiary main contractor. This is a requirement in almost
Claiming negligent misrepresentation or negligent misstatement—practical considerationsA claim for negligent misrepresentation may often be brought alongside or in the alternative to a claim for negligent misstatement. It is therefore useful to understand the key practical considerations in respect
LR1. Date of the lease[date]LR2. Title Number(s)LR2.1 Landlord's title number(s)[title numbers out of which this Lease is granted. Leave blank if not registered]LR2.2 Other title numbers[existing title number(s) against which entries of matters referred to in LR9, LR10, LR11 and LR13 are to be
Indemnity costs orders—principlesThis Practice Note considers orders for costs determined on an indemnity basis (indemnity costs orders). A court may order that costs are assessed on an indemnity basis so that any doubt as to the costs claimed are resolved in favour of the receiving party. Compare
0330 161 1234