BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you
consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it
will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free
access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[New search]
[Printable RTF version]
[Help]
Dunnes Stores(Limerick)Ltd/Tenants at Sarsfield S.C. [1993] IECA 135 (13th October, 1993)
Notification
No. CA/880/92E - Dunnes Stores (Limerick) Ltd/ Tenants at Sarsfield Shopping
Centre
Decision
No. 135
Introduction
1. Notification
was made by Dunnes Stores (Limerick) Ltd on 30 September 1992 with a request
for a Certificate under
Section 4(4) of the
Competition Act 1991, or in the
event of a refusal by the Competition Authority to issue a certificate, a
licence under
Section 4(2), in respect of leases between Dunnes Stores
(Limerick) Ltd and tenants at Sarsfield Shopping Centre.
The
Facts
(a) The
subject of the notification
2. The
notification concerns the lease of shop units in the Sarsfield Shopping
Centre, Honan's Quay, Limerick between Dunnes Stores (Limerick) Ltd as Landlord
and 6 tenants at the shopping centre.
(b) The
parties involved
3. Dunnes
Stores (Limerick) Ltd is engaged in the business of trading as a supermarket
and the letting of shop units at the Sarsfield Shopping Centre. The tenants are
engaged in various retail and service activities at the centre.
(c) The
notified arrangements
4. The
standard shopping centre lease notified was in draft form. The restricted user
clauses in this lease are as follows:-
(a) Under
clause 4.20 the tenant covenants
"Not
to use or occupy the demised premises or any part thereof .....for any other
purpose than the retail trade or business of
nor in any manner inconsistent with such user or occupation.........."
(b) Under
clause 4.17 the tenant covenants
(a) "Not
to assign underlet or part with the possession .........of part only of the
demised premises.
(b) Not
to assign underlet or part with the possession .........of the whole of the
demised premises without the consent in writing of the Landlord first obtained
which consent will not be unreasonably witheld.....
In
addition, there are a number of other standard restrictive covenants and
obligations in the standard lease.
Dunnes
Stores (Limerick) Ltd has notified the Permitted User attaching to each tenant
under clause 4.20 whereby each tenant is restricted to particular specified
trading or service activities.
Assessment
- The applicability of section 4 (1)
5. The
Authority considers that Dunnes Stores (Limerick) Ltd and the tenants are
undertakings and that the notified leases are agreements between undertakings.
The agreements have effect within the State.
6. The
Authority considers that the notified agreements, and their restricted and
exclusive user clauses and the other restrictive clauses and obligations, do
not have the object or effect of preventing, restricting or distorting
competition in trade in any goods or services in the State or in any part of
the State, for the reasons given in the Notice of the Authority of 2 September
1993 in respect of shopping centre leases (Iris Oifigiuil 10 September 1993
pp.665-667). The Authority therefore considers that the notified agreements
between Dunnes Stores (Limerick) Ltd and the tenants do not offend against
section 4(1) of the
Competition Act l99l.
The
Certificate
7. The
Competition Authority has issued the following certificate.
The
Competition Authority certifies that in its opinion, on the basis of the facts
in its possession, the agreements between Dunnes Stores (Limerick) Ltd and the
tenants in relation to the leases of premises at Sarsfield Shopping Centre,
Limerick notified under
Section 7 on 30 September 1992 (notification no.
CA/880/92E), do not offend against
Section 4(1) of the
Competition Act, l99l.
For
the Competition Authority
Des
Wall
Member
13
October 1993
© 1993 Irish Competition Authority
BAILII:
Copyright Policy |
Disclaimers |
Privacy Policy |
Feedback |
Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IECompA/1993/135.html