Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-03-Speech-2-233"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030603.7.2-233"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The honourable Member’s question is not just undeniably of interest but is also extremely topical. The question is interesting in any case because the barriers to parallel trade in pharmaceutical products have for some time been a source of concern to the Commission, which has already prepared many cases for trial in this field in the past and continues do so now. In particular, a large number of cases are currently under investigation in the competition sector, at the request of both pharmaceutical laboratories and complainants. The matter is also, as I said, highly topical.
As you are aware, the Commission has two legal instruments under which it can take action: Articles 81 and 82. With regard to Article 81, just a few days ago, Mr Tizzano, the Advocate General of the Court of Justice, presented his conclusions on the Bayer case, relating to parallel trade in one of the company’s products. I do not want to go into the details of this case or the conclusions of the Advocate General, which concern a matter of highly specific legal practice. The conclusions do not, however, endorse the lines taken by the Commission on the case. The Court’s judgment will be issued in a few month’s time but will not, in any case, compromise the Commission’s other decisions on issues different from the matters addressed in the Bayer case, such as, for instance, the decision adopted by the Commission on 8 May 2001 on the dual pricing system employed by the company
.
As far as Article 82 is concerned, the Commission is currently working along precisely these lines. That raises a number of new questions, especially with regard to the definition of markets and abusive practices. Moreover, last February, the Court of Justice received a preliminary question from the Greek Competition Committee, which is the Greek authority responsible for competition. This preliminary question seeks to establish to what extent the refusal by a pharmaceutical company in a dominant position to supply a wholesaler with a view to stopping parallel trade can be deemed to be abuse prohibited by Article 82 of the EC Treaty. The Commission will, as usual, be called upon to express its opinion to the Court in the coming weeks, but the Court is not due to issue its judgment for many months yet."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Glaxo"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples