European Court Votes For Higher Prices

[*End Is Forever*]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/business/newsid_1665000/1665890.stm

[*End Is Forever*]

While the UK government backed Tesco, the French and Italian administrations sided with the brand owners.

Interesting...

[Solly]

While it's a bad decision for the consumer, shouldn't sellers have a choice over who they sell to and at which price?

[MattHiggs]

I think we should ignore the European court and let Tesco sell what they want in OUR F*CKING COUNTRY!

[DinoDoc]

...

Inf beat me to it.

[*End Is Forever*]

Quite possibly. However, Levi Strauss are willingly selling their product to wholesale firms in the US, and then complaining when those companies sell the good on to British supermarkets.

I can't see how this breaks any laws.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MattHiggs
I think we should ignore the European court and let Tesco sell what they want in OUR F*CKING COUNTRY!

You signed on to the organization. Now take your medicine.

[*End Is Forever*]

Basically if you look at the ruling... actually selling the good is not illegal. Indeed, even importing the good isn't illegal. It is only the amount of the good that is being imported that is illegal. In other words, the EU has implemented an import quota.

Right or wrong?

[TCO]

I don't even know what the ruling is...but the whole discussion sounds Mickey Mouse.

Britain...come join NAFTA...who loves ya, baby!! If the Swiss don't need the EU, neither do you...

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by MattHiggs


I think we should ignore the European court and let Tesco sell what they want in OUR F*CKING COUNTRY!

Do that and we'll fine your ass for infigement of Community Law too, islander

Ok, gotta go. But the swiss want to join the EU; it's the bank executives and their sorry sold out politicians who don't let them join yet (in order to keep the huge financial inflaw the tailored swiss made bank secrecy laws provide)

Just a matter fo time; you can't go against the will of the people

[Roland]

Letssee if this link works. (if it does should bring you to the full text of the judgment)

http://www.europa.eu.int/jurisp/cgi-...e=ARRET&where=()

Iain:

"actually selling the good is not illegal. Indeed, even importing the good isn't illegal. It is only the amount of the good that is being imported that is illegal."

No, it's the matter of who can distribute trade marked goods against the will of the trade mark holder.

"In other words, the EU has implemented an import quota."

Uhm... that's funny, but I wish you luck in getting that out of the Davidoff judgment....

GP:

"Britain...come join NAFTA...who loves ya, baby!!"

Oh please, yes. That would be so piss funny, I'd do nothing but laugh for years...

"If the Swiss don't need the EU, neither do you..."

ROTFLMGDFAO... George, you're a riot!

[faded glory]

NAFTA is a better deal than the EU. Cheaper Consumer goods and more economic devolopment for member states.

[Roland]

"NAFTA is a better deal than the EU. Cheaper Consumer goods and more economic devolopment for member states."

Yeah sure. A free trade area vs economic and monetary union. Oh boy, that REALLY hurts... where's the LMAO smiley ????

[faded glory]

Well wasnt the whole reason of forming the EU to become an Economic Rival to America

Dont give me all this BS about unity...thats the only reason the EU has gone as far as it has.

[Roland]

"Well wasnt the whole reason of forming the EU to become an Economic Rival to America"

a) this is completely irrelevant to the different dimension of economic integration we are talking about. At least I'm not aware that NAFTA includes tiny things like say the free movement of workers.

b) it is wrong in that we really have other things to worry about.