소수지분 취득의 선례로서 BAT and Reynolds 사건의 분석 = A Study on the Case BAT and Reynolds as a Precedent of Minority Share-holdings

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

BAT and Reynolds, competitors of Philip Morris claimed that to allow PhilipMorris a certain interest in Rothmans would, in effect, allow it to influenceconditions in the european tobacco market. After consulting with theCommission about these concerns, Philip Morris offered to amend the deal. Satisfied with the changes, the Commission granted Philip Morris anexemption. However, as soon as the Commission decided to grant theexemption, BAT and Reynolds lodged a complaint with the ECJ under Article173 (now Article 230) to have the exemption overturned. The firms pushedtheir claim that the acquisition would allow Philip Morris powerful leverage ofRothmans. They argued that Philip Morris might, among other things, use itsprivileged position to seek control of Rothmans in the future. The Court,unconvinced by the argument presented by RJ Reynolds/BAT, ruled in favourof the Commission/Philip Morris. Today this Case still have the larger meaning and has served as an importantprecedent in that it present the principles of procedural rights and reveals theeffect of competition restraints of minority share-holdings in our competitionpolicy.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이상돈, "소수지분 취득에 대한 경쟁제한적 기업결합규제 - 유럽 및 미국 경쟁법과의 비교법적 검토" 한국경쟁법학회 하계학술대회, 2014

2 조성국, "공정거래법 집행론" 경인문화사, 2010

3 OECD, "Trade and Competition: From Doha to Cancun" 2003

4 Sehgal, A., "Evolution of the EU Merger Regulations Explained by Relevant Case Studies" Competition Commission of India, 2012

5 Horspool, M., "European Union Law" Oxford Univ. Press, 2008

6 Tabaczyk, E. J., "Establishing Locus Standi under Article 173(2) of the EEC Treaty" Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business 7, 1985

7 Ezrachi, A., "EU Competition Law" Hart Publishing, 2010

8 Jones, A., "EU Competition Law" Oxford Univ. Press, 2011

9 Goyder, J., "EC Competition Law" Oxford Univ. Press, 2009