What is the aim of this article,

why and how does this link to

the goals of competition law?
It was part of the EUs drive
towards ensuring that fair
competition xisted between
member
states by stopping agreements
which had an anti competitive
effect and foreclosed the
internal market competition.
The commission pointed out
that 'article 101 is to protect
effective competition bu
ensuring that markets remain
open and competitive. " So any
agreement that would likely
distort competition with the EU
is therefore prohibited by this
article even if agreement signed
outside of the EU since article
101 effects all trathe that
would have an impact in the
internal market as identified in
Gas insulated switchgear.
The main aim of article 101 is
to provide redress to those
affected by any restrictions that
are placed on free competition
within the internal market. Free
competition is a vital part of
the functioning of the internal
market which is why it is
imperative that provisions are in
place to prohibit any restriction
that are placed on trade.
If a businesses commercial
agreements have sufficient
effects on competition in the
market
place then they may be caught
by the article 101 (1)
prohibition. If so any restricted
provisions are unenforceable
under article 101 (20, in serious
cases they risk fines, unless
they meet the exemption criteria
of article 101 (3). However it
doesn't have to be proven
that they don't satisfy article
101 (3) for it to be prohibited
under 101 (1 Q: 1
Q:1
Children’s Help is a charity established in the Netherlands. They share the same
objective, the protection of children, with Kid’s Hotline, a charity established in a
nearby town in Germany. In order to raise money for their activities, both charities
sell knitted hats. The hats are quite successful and are sold in shops in the EU. In
the Netherlands and Belgium, Children’s Help holds around 6 per cent of the
market for knitted hats, while Kid’s Hotline holds around 2 per cent. In Germany,
Kid’s Hotline holds around 5 per cent of the market, and Children’s Help holds
about 3.5 per cent. Both charities hold negligible market shares in other EU
Member States. Worried about its declining reputation at home, Kid’s Hotline
approaches Children’s Help with a proposal to stop selling to Germany, promising
that they will not sell to the Netherlands and Belgium either. Children’s Help is
tempted to agree but has some doubts as to whether the agreement breaches EU
competition law.
Advise Children’s Help.
Please also discuss how Pakistani law will tackle this, if Children’s Help was
situated in Pakistan. Support your answer with case laws (20 marks)
Answer
The above inquiry needs guidance on Competition law in the European Union.
Before proceeding onward to talk about what the European Union Competition
Law would one say one has to realize what are the points and target of European
Union Competition?
The primary point of Competition Law article 101 is to give a review to those
influenced by any limitations that are set on free rivalry inside the interior market.
The free rivalry is a fundamental piece of the working of the inward market which
is the reason it is basic that arrangements are set up to forbid any limitation that is
put on the exchange. In the event that business understandings effectively affect
rivalry in the commercial centre then they might be gotten by article 101(1)
forbiddance. In the event that so any limited arrangements are unenforceable under
article 101 in genuine cases, they chance fines, except if they meet the exclusion
rules of article 101(3). Anyway, it doesn't need to be demonstrated that they don't
fulfil article 101(3) for it to be disallowed under 101(1).
European Union is consist of 27 Member states and it is a political and economic
union with the aim of a free market. European Union aims includes four freedoms
single market, internal market or common market is a single market which seeks to
guarantee the free movement of goods, capital, services and Labor the four
freedoms within the EU.
Does the European Union Competition strategy originate from?

Article 101 and 109 of the treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
(TFEU), just as a progression of Regulations and orders. There are five principle
strategy regions incorporate Cartels or control of plot and other anticompetitive
practices under Article 101of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
(TFEU) and EU gives "Inner Market" which implies one area without any
obstructions. The Treaty of Rome, formally called Treaty building up the European
Economic Community (EEC Treaty) achieved the formation of the European
Economic Community (EEC), marked on 25 March 1957 by Belgium, France,
Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands and West Germany and came into power on first
January 1958. Under the name Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
(TFEU), it stays one of the most significant settlements in the current European
Union (EU). Body/organ of TFEU structure that
  Council of EU being Legislative body
 European Commission being Executive body
 General courts dealing with competition cases
 Court of Justice
Effect on trade between member states
For the EU law to apply, this agreement etc. must effect trade between member
states. The court of justice has adopted a broad interpretation of this requirement
covering all cross border economic activity. If it doesn’t then the national
competition law will apply.
As a counsel of Children Help (with 3.5% market share), I need to expound Article
101 TFEU either Children Help Charity association can do or not?
Article 101 of TFEU of European Union denies Cartels and different
understandings that could disturb free competition in the European Economic
Areas inside Market.
In the above situation, we need to Children Help whether it falls inside the Article
101 or not on the off chance that it falls inside the Article 101 it will be void yet
then again on the off chance that it falls outside the Article 101 it will be permitted.
Five components must be available for the denial in article 101 (1) TFEU
(Formerly TEC, Art 81) to apply.
All agreements between undertakings, decisions by associations of undertakings
and concerted practices which may effect trade between member states, and which
have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition
within the internal market, and an agreement is prohibited by Article 101(1) and
which does not satisfy Article 101(3) is automatically void by virtue of Article
101(2).
A point that should be noted here is that on the off chance that it falls inside the
Article 101 (3) which sets out the special cases before we proceed onward one
have to realize what article 101 states the main inquiry should be tended to is
whether the Children Help is embraced or not.
The EU Competition Law didn't characterize undertaking. So as to address the
issue that whether Children Help is attempted or not these case laws will assist
with explaining whether it is an undertaking or not.
Jurisdictional conditions:
EU Law
Hofner and Elser v Macrotron that: The concept of an undertaking encompasses
every entity engaged in an economic activity regardless of the legal status of the
entity and the way in which it is financed. So, in this scenario the Children Help is
wholly engaged in economic activity and in the light of Hofner case it is
considered as Undertaking. And in Pavlov case the Court added that it has also
been consistently held that any activity consisting in offering goods or services on
a given market is an economic activity. Children Help was involved in activity of
offering of goods or services.
MR JACOBS — CASE C-475/99 ambulances shows that undertaking which are
working for public welfare So Children Help fall in the ambit of undertaking in
this case briefly explain in view of the economic characteristics of the markets in
question there is a sufficient degree of likelihood that that rule prevents operators
established in other Member States from operating ambulances or establishing
themselves
Pakistani Law
The term ‘undertaking’ is defined in Section 2(1) (q) of the Competition Act 2010
to mean, ‘any natural or legal person, governmental body including a regulatory
authority, body corporate, partnership, association trust or other entity in any way
engaged, directly or indirectly, in the production, supply, distribution of goods or
provision or control of services and shall include an association of undertakings.’

The organizations may have a place with a group of the undertaking. For that Court
has held that there is no limitation of competition between undertaking having a
place with one group where, for instance, a subsidiary appreciates no economic
freedom from its parent organization Case 22/71 Béguelin Import Co. v S.A.G.L.
Import Export. From the above conversation, Children Help falls inside the ambit
of the undertaking.
As per Article 101 TFEU, an understanding might be oral Case 28/77 Tepea v
Commission; Cases T-2 5/95 and so on Cemeteries CBR SA v Commission.
Article 101 TFEU worries with facilitated conduct between undertakings where
this coordination may take a few structures, yet the most significant angle for
applying this arrangement is that we or progressively autonomous undertaking
must be included Case C 279/06 CEPSA Estaciones de Servicio SA v LV Tobar
e Hijos SL. So as to demonstrate the presence of an agreement, the only thing that
is in any way important is proof of evidence of the wills, independent of the
structure to the extent that this structure comprises the dependable portrayal of the
party’s goals C-3/01 P Commission v Bayer AG.
Children Help and other undertaking concerning horizontal restrictions,
coordination between undertakings in a similar market, the standard is extensively
lower and brought down significantly more in instances of a solitary constant
encroachment. In exemplary cartel cases, proof of only one gathering does the trick
to demonstrate an understanding between the individuals who went to the
gathering, regardless of whether just data was uncovered and no (express)
simultaneousness of the wills of other members' response on this data was looked
for or gotten Case T-202/98 Tate and Lyle plc, British Sugar plc and Napier
Brown and Co. Ltd v Commission.
In such manner, most issues emerge according to the least all around characterized
and most transparently finished type of coordination which is Concerted Practice.
The concerted practice is comprehended by the European Court of Justice as 'less
formalized' types of coordination Joined Cases 40/73 to 48/73, 50/73, 54/73 to
56/73, 111/73, 113/73 and 114/73 Suiker Unie and Others v Commission where
mental accord is must. This pressure is less obvious where the purposeful practice
frames some portion of a solitary constant encroachment and speaks to minimal in
excess of a less organized period in the cartel's presence Case C-49/92 P
Commission of the European Communities v Anic Partecipazioni Spa. The
pressure is most unmistakably noticeable where the market included shows
characteristics of an oligopoly.

Oligopolistic markets show a serious extent of fixation, homogeneous items and

creation procedures, and market straightforwardness with advertise structure under
3 associations. For my situation of Children help, fall under oral understanding yet
neither concerted practice nor oligopoly.

Article 101 TFEU precludes understandings that have object and effect to prevent,
confine or distort competition. The article or impact may incorporate price-fixing
and market sharing. The principle analysis in Article 101 application is that it has
the more extensive sense to include those understandings which are not
unfavorable to competition by any stretch of the imagination Marquis (Germany)
v Commission. In basic words, understandings that are fall in Article 101(1) are
void and may draw in a fine, except if fulfil the models set out in Article 101(3).
To see whether object or effect of my agreement restrict competition, mere
establishing anti-competitive object is enough rather than proving effect on
competition. Only intention of parties is not essential factor whether agreement is
restrictive (T-Mobile Netherlands) while provisions must have objectives to attain
economic context (GlaxoSmithKline Services Unlimited v Commission). As it is
an agreement containing obvious restrictions of competition such as price- fixing
(European Night Services v Commission), so it has restrictive effect on
competition. So my children help company falls in the ambit of object and effect
provisions of Article 101.

Where article and impact of an understanding aren't built up, the commission sets
up illegal per se approach fundamentally approach utilized by EU commission to
take a gander at understanding just however not impact on financial real factors,
while the USA utilizes the rule of reason approach, where courts look
understanding in monetary setting before pronouncing unlawful.

In order to see if there is an effect of our agreement on trade between Member

States. For that either our agreement has actually increased trade in the products or
negative effect (Consten & Grundig v Commission). In children help case,
agreement has negative effect on trade between member states.

DE MINIMIS approach says Agreements may also fall outside Article 101(1) of
the Treaty because they are not capable of appreciably affecting trade between
Member States. This Notice does not indicate what constitutes an appreciable
effect on trade between Member States. Guidance to that effect is to be found in
the Commission’s Notice on effect on trade in which the Commission quantifies,
with the help of the combination of a 5% market share threshold and a EUR 40
million turnover threshold, which agreements are in principle not capable of
appreciably affecting trade between Member States. Such agreements normally fall
outside Article 101(1) of the Treaty even if they have as their object the
prevention, restriction or distortion of competition and where the Commission has
instituted proceedings but undertakings can demonstrate that they have assumed in
good faith that the market shares mentioned in points 8, 9, 10 and 11 were not
exceeded, the Commission will not impose fines. Although not binding on them,
this Notice is also intended to give guidance to the courts and competition
authorities of the Member States in their application of Article 101 of the Treaty.
In order to calculate the market share, it is necessary to determine the relevant
market. This consists of the relevant product market and the relevant geographic
market. When defining the relevant market, reference should be had to the Notice
on the definition of the relevant market. The market shares are to be calculated on
the basis of sales value data or, where appropriate, purchase value data. If value
data are not available, estimates based on other reliable market information,
including volume data, may be used. In view of the clarification of the Court of
Justice referred to in point 2, this does not cover agreements which have as their
object the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition within the internal
market. The Commission will thus not apply the safe harbour created by the
market share thresholds set out in points 8, 9, 10 and 11 to such agreements. For
instance, as regards agreements between competitors, the Commission will not
apply the principles set out in this notice to, in particular, agreements containing
restrictions which, directly or indirectly, have as their object: the fixing of prices
when selling products to third parties; the limitation of output or sales; or the
allocation of markets or customers. Likewise, the Commission will not apply the
safe harbour created by those market share thresholds to agreements containing
any of the restrictions that are listed as hardcore restrictions in any current or future
Commission block exemption regulation, which are considered by the Commission
to generally constitute restrictions by object. The safe harbour created by the
market share thresholds set out in points 8, 9, 10 and 11 is particularly relevant for
categories of agreements not covered by any Commission block exemption
regulation. The safe harbour is also relevant for agreements covered by a
Commission block exemption regulation to the extent that those agreements
contain a so-called excluded restriction, that is a restriction not listed as a hardcore
restriction but none the less not covered by the Commission block exemption
regulation.

According to Pakistan law Section 1(3) of the Competition Act provides that it
applies to all actions or matters that take place in Pakistan and distort competition
within Pakistan. Competition law in Pakistan is enforced by the Competition
Commission of Pakistan (the ‘Commission’). The Commission is a body corporate
with regulatory and quasi-judicial functions and is designed to be administratively
and functionally independent from the Federal Government. The Commission has
been given and anti competitive agreements Regarding prohibited agreements,
section 4 of the Act states No undertaking or association of undertakings shall
enter into any agreement or, in the case of an association of undertakings, shall
make a decision in respect of the production, supply, distribution, acquisition or
control of goods or the provision of services which have the object or effect of
preventing, restricting or reducing or distorting competition within the relevant
market unless exempted under section 5 of this Ordinance. The term ‘undertaking’
is defined in Section 2(1)(q) of the Competition Act to mean, ‘any natural or legal
person, governmental body including a regulatory authority, body corporate,
partnership, association trust or other entity in any way engaged, directly or
indirectly, in the production, supply, distribution of goods or provision or control
of services and shall include an association of undertakings. Section 2(1)(k) of the
Competition Act defines the term ‘relevant market’ to mean the market which shall
be determined by the Commission with reference to a product market and a
geographic market. A ‘product market’ consists of those products which are
regarded as interchangeable or substitutable by consumers by reason of the
product's characteristics, prices and intended use. A ‘geographic market’ comprises
the area in which the undertakings concerned are involved in the supply of
products or services and in which the conditions of competition are sufficiently
homogenous and which can be distinguished from neighbouring geographic areas
because, in particular, the conditions of competition are appreciably different in
those areas.

According to EU and Pakistani Law Children help is a charitable organization and

these organization work for public welfare and they have certificate which issued
by the government and children help due to small market share and not as high
which slandered are set in EU law is not exceeding above which distort the
competition.