There are agreements which, by their nature, are contrary to competition. The ECJ`s case-law on concerted practices is not as uniform and simple as accusing case-law of agreements. The ECJ`s first case concerning concerted practices was here against the Commission.  TO HERE v. Commission, dye producers across Europe have experienced three separate and identical price increases on different national markets within the common market.  There was no agreement to increase prices, so the analysis had to be done on the basis of the theory of concerted practices. All price increases were uniform.  In a conclusion, Advocate General Mayras analysed the case and found that, in order to find a concerted practice, it is necessary to examine the actual impact on the market, since a concerted practice cannot be dissociated from the actual impact on competition.  Therefore, unlike the agreements in question, the analysis of concerted practices requires an examination of all effects on the market, as these effects are informative and serve as evidence of the existence of a concerted practice that has affected competition. . . .