Brussels, 14/01/2003 (Agence Europe) - As foreseen, the European Commission has decided to clear the acquisition of French plastic packaging machines maker Sidel by Swiss-Swedish carton packaging leader Tetra Laval. The clearance is conditional on several commitments being adhered to. In October 2001, the Commission examined the merger and threw the merger out because of the risk of creating a dominant position. A year later the Court of First Instance (CFI) of 25 October 2002 annulled the Commission's prohibition decision giving the two companies the chance to merge for a second time (see EUROPE 26 October 2002 p 10). After reassessing the information updated by Tetra and taking into consideration the conditions laid down in the CFI decision, the Commission decided that this operation would not pose any risk to competition in connection with "Tetra Fast" stretch blow moulding (SBM) a new technology, which is currently being tested and which creates finished PET plastic bottles by stretching and blowing the PET preforms in a mould, which gives the bottle its shape (stretch-blow moulding) and which would create certain significant economies. The Commission explains that this technology is recent and was not taken into consideration in the previous decision in 2001. In an effort to lift the Commission's concerns about competition Tetra made a commitment to licence its Tetra Fast technology. The Commission took note of further commitments regarding Tetra's assignment of proprietary SBM technology unrelated to "Tetra Fast" and regarding the PET pre-forms market which Tetra undertook not to re-enter for the next five years.
The decision in question could, nevertheless be "affected" by the results of the Commission appeal to the European Court of Justice on 20 December 2002, according to which the level of proof demanded by the Court of First Instance for justifying the risks of a dominant positions were disproportionate. A re-examination of the first Commission decision could therefore be requested by the Court of Justice or the CFI in the perspective of the case being referred back.