소수지분 취득의 선례로서 BAT and Reynolds 사건의 분석

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.