Crumlin/ Light Bite [1994] IECA 279 (4th February, 1994)

Crumlin/ Light Bite [1994] IECA 279 (4th February, 1994)

The Competition Authority determined that the lease and its restrictive clauses do not have the object or effect of preventing, restricting, or distorting competition in the State, referencing its prior notice on shopping centre leases.

Citation
[1994] IECA 279
Parties
Landlord: Crumlin Investments Ltd; Tenant: Light Bite
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Notification for Certificate/licence Under Competition Act 1991 / Decision Issued by Competition Authority
Outcome
certificate issued
Legal Topics
Shopping Centre Lease, Restrictive Covenants, Exclusive User Clauses
Competition Law Property Law Shopping Centre Lease Restrictive Covenants Exclusive User Clauses

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crumlin Investments Ltd

Landlord

Light Bite

Tenant

Procedural Posture

Notification for Certificate/licence Under Competition Act 1991 / Decision Issued by Competition Authority

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lease agreement between Crumlin Investments Ltd and Light Bite prevents, restricts, or distorts competition under section 4(1) of the Competition Act, 1991

Ratio Decidendi

The Competition Authority determined that the lease and its restrictive clauses do not have the object or effect of preventing, restricting, or distorting competition in the State, referencing its prior notice on shopping centre leases.

Court Disposition

certificate issued

Orders

  • The Competition Authority certifies that the agreement between Crumlin Investments Ltd and Light Bite does not offend against section 4(1) of the Competition Act, 1991.