Antitrust Enforcement Actions: July 2024
Rohit Arora????
Competition/Antitrust Lawyer | Supporting National & International Clients with Indian Competition Law | Litigation & Compliance Solutions | Comprehensive Antitrust Advisory
A. INDIA ????
1. Competition Commission Closes Cartel Case Involving Railway Tender Allegations
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has closed an investigation into alleged cartelization involving the Integral Coach Factory (ICF) and two companies, Super Steels (OP-2) and Alvind Industries (OP-3), following a complaint from an informant who was granted confidentiality.
The case revolved around a tender issued by ICF on February 6, 2023, for the procurement of lower spring beams. The informant alleged that the eligibility criteria favored a select group of vendors, effectively limiting competition to only two active participants—Super Steels and Alvind Industries—despite the presence of five approved sources. Additionally, the informant accused OP-2 and OP-3 of engaging in a cartel by consistently coordinating their bids, allowing OP-2 to secure the lowest bid (L1) in multiple tenders over the past 6-7 years, with OP-3 accepting the L1 rate without attempting to underbid.
The CCI noted that while there was a minor price difference between the bids of OP-2 and OP-3 in previous tenders, no substantial evidence was provided to support the claim of cartelization. The commission also highlighted that other approved and unapproved bidders had quoted rates in the same range or higher than those of OP-2 and OP-3.
In the absence of sufficient evidence, the CCI concluded that the allegations of cartelization were unfounded and decided to close the case.
2. No Evidence of Anti-Competitive Practices: Competition Commission Clears Saint Gobain India
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has closed a case filed against Saint Gobain India and its parent company, Compagnie De Saint-Gobain, based in France, citing a lack of evidence for the alleged violations of competition law.
The complaint, filed by an informant who was granted confidentiality, accused Saint Gobain India of engaging in anti-competitive agreements with processors, fabricators, and distributors involved in the glass products market. The allegations centered on an agreement titled the "Propel Project Participation Agreement" (Propel Agreement), which purportedly imposed exclusive supply obligations, forced co-branding, refusal to deal, and resale price maintenance on downstream players.
After reviewing the case, the CCI noted that the informant relied on an undated and unsigned version of the Propel Agreement and could not provide a signed copy of any actual agreement between Saint Gobain India and a processor. The commission also observed that the alleged anti-competitive practices were based on oral directions, which were not substantiated with evidence.
The CCI examined the Propel Agreement and concluded that the exclusive supply obligation applied only to specialized glass products and was part of a quid pro quo arrangement that benefited both parties. The commission also found that the co-branding requirement did not raise competition concerns and that the allegations of refusal to deal and resale price maintenance were unsupported.
In light of these findings, the CCI determined that no prima facie case was made against Saint Gobain India and directed the closure of the case.
3. CCI Closes Case on Alleged Unfair Practices by Toyota Kirloskar Motors
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has dismissed a complaint filed by Shri Balbir Singh Nagpal against Toyota Kirloskar Motors Pvt. Ltd. (OP-1) and its authorized dealer, Uttam Toyota (OP-2), citing a lack of evidence of anti-competitive practices.
The complaint centered around the booking of an Innova Hycross Hybrid ZX(O) car on 25th November 2022. The Informant alleged that despite being assured of a two-month delivery time, the waiting period was extended to eight months. Furthermore, it was claimed that customers who booked their vehicles on the same or subsequent dates received their cars before the Informant. The complaint also accused OP-2 of favoring certain customers, creating artificial scarcity, and imposing resale price maintenance (RPM), thereby adversely affecting competition in the market.
The CCI examined the case, noting that Toyota Kirloskar Motors had informed the Informant about the eight-month waiting period at the time of booking, and attributed delays to the ongoing semiconductor shortage affecting the global automobile industry. Uttam Toyota also denied prioritizing other customers over the Informant.
The Commission determined that the allegations were primarily a matter of dispute between the Informant and the opposite parties, lacking broader anti-competitive implications. The CCI also found no evidence to support the claim of resale price maintenance or any abuse of a dominant position by Toyota Kirloskar Motors. Consequently, the Commission decided to close the case under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002.
4. CCI Dismisses Gubba Cold's Allegations Against Vishakapatnam Port Logistics
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has closed an Information filed by Gubba Cold Private Ltd. against Vishakapatnam Port Logistics Park Limited (OP-1) and its branch office (OP-2) in Vishakapatnam. Gubba Cold, which provides temperature-controlled storage facilities for perishable goods, alleged that the OPs had abused their dominant position by enforcing unfair terms in a Leave and License Agreement.
Gubba Cold claimed that the agreement's "lock-in-period" clause, requiring an 18-month tenancy or forfeiture of the security deposit, was coercive. The company also accused the OPs of threatening to cut off power supply to the cold storage facility, potentially damaging goods worth around ?100 crores.
The CCI reviewed the complaint and observed that the issues raised appeared to be contractual disputes rather than competition concerns. The Commission concluded that there was no prima facie case of contravention under the Competition Act, 2002, and ordered the closure of the case, stating that the allegations did not warrant an investigation.
5. CCI Rules Out Competition Violations in Dispute Involving Paytm and Airtel
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has dismissed a complaint filed by Col. Arvind Kumar against One97 Communications Ltd (Paytm), Aditya Birla Finance Limited, Bharti Airtel Limited, and Central Bank of India, alleging anti-competitive practices and abuse of dominant positions.
Col. Kumar, the Informant, had raised issues regarding Airtel's delay in disconnecting his old broadband connection and the continued billing for the non-existent service. Additionally, he alleged that Paytm, without his authorization, processed payments to Airtel from his account with Central Bank of India, even after he instructed the bank to stop such transactions. He further claimed that Paytm had entered into an exclusive dealing arrangement with Aditya Birla, forcing consumers into transactions without their consent.
The CCI, after examining the information and evidence presented, concluded that the disputes primarily revolved around individual contractual issues and did not raise any competition concerns under the Competition Act, 2002. The Commission observed that the allegations did not indicate any violation of the Act, as the disputes were related to misrepresentation, mis-selling, or deficiency in service, which are beyond the CCI's jurisdiction.
Given the lack of prima facie evidence of contravention of competition law, the CCI decided to close the matter, directing the Informant to seek remedies from appropriate forums if necessary.
6. No Prima Facie Case Against Indiabulls Housing Finance in Loan Interest Rate Dispute, Rules CCI
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has dismissed a complaint filed by Mr. Anil Bansal, Director of M/s Karmyogi Hotels & Buildcon Ltd, against Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited (IHFL) and its officers. The complaint alleged unfair trade practices and abuse of dominant position in relation to two Loan Against Property (LAP) facilities availed by the Informant from IHFL.
The Informant claimed that IHFL unilaterally increased the floating interest rate on the loans without prior notice, leading to an increased number of installments. Despite repeated requests, IHFL allegedly failed to provide loan statements or issue a no-dues certificate after the final installment was paid in March 2023. The Informant also alleged that IHFL imposed penalties on pre-payment, making it difficult for customers to switch lenders, thereby stifling competition in the loan market.
The CCI examined the allegations and concluded that the relevant market, defined as the "provision of loan against property in India," is competitive, with numerous banks and non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) operating in the sector. The Commission found no evidence of IHFL's dominance in this market. Furthermore, the CCI determined that the alleged unfair practices did not constitute anti-competitive behavior under Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.
As a result, the CCI ruled that there was no prima facie case of contravention of the Act and ordered the matter to be closed under Section 26(2) of the Act.
7. NCLAT Upholds Penalty in UP Soil Testing Bid-Rigging Case; Reduces Fine for Lesser Involvement
The Competition Commission received a complaint dated August 7, 2018, alleging bid-rigging in tenders for soil sample testing invited by the Department of Agriculture, Government of Uttar Pradesh. The complaint claimed that five bidders colluded to manipulate the bidding process, violating Section 3(1) read with Section 3(3)(d) of the Competition Act, 2022.
Key Entities Involved:
Allegations: The complaint accused these entities of engaging in cover bidding, bid rotation, and collusive bidding practices across 2017 and 2018 tenders. Specifically, Austere Systems and Yash Solutions allegedly divided geographical areas for bidding or provided cover bids for each other to secure tenders.
Investigation Findings:
Commission's Conclusion: The Commission concluded that the entities engaged in anti-competitive conduct and bid-rigging in violation of Section 3(3)(c) and 3(3)(d) read with Section 3(1) of the Act. They were directed to cease such practices.
NCLAT Decision: The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) upheld the Commission's findings but reduced the penalty for Delicacy Continental, acknowledging its lesser role in the cartel. The penalty was reduced to 3% of average annual turnover over the last three years.
Competition Appeal (AT) No. 34 of 2022.
B. EUROPEAN UNION ????
8. EU Investigates Potential Cartel Activities by Major Food Delivery Firms;
The European Commission has initiated a formal antitrust investigation into Delivery Hero and Glovo, two major players in Europe’s food delivery sector. The inquiry aims to determine if these companies have breached EU competition rules by engaging in cartel activities within the European Economic Area (EEA).
Concerns have arisen that, prior to Delivery Hero acquiring full control of Glovo in July 2022, the companies may have allocated geographic markets and exchanged commercially sensitive information, including details on commercial strategies, pricing, capacity, and costs. Additionally, the Commission is investigating whether Delivery Hero and Glovo agreed not to poach each other’s employees. These activities might have been facilitated by Delivery Hero’s minority stake in Glovo since July 2018.
To gather evidence, the Commission conducted unannounced inspections at the companies’ premises in June 2022 and November 2023. This investigation marks the first time the Commission is examining potential anti-competitive agreements stemming from a minority shareholding in a competitor.
If the allegations are substantiated, Delivery Hero and Glovo could face significant penalties and be required to modify their business practices to comply with EU competition laws.
9. EU Makes Vifor's Commitments Legally Binding to Address Antitrust Concerns
The European Commission has made commitments offered by Vifor legally binding under EU antitrust rules. These commitments address concerns over Vifor's potential disparagement of Monofer, a competing intravenous iron medicine to Vifor's Ferinject. The Commission preliminarily found that Vifor may hold a dominant position in several national markets for intravenous iron medicines, including Austria, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, and the Netherlands.
The Commission's investigation revealed that Vifor may have restricted competition by disseminating misleading information about the safety of Monofer, potentially hindering its uptake in the European Economic Area (EEA). To address these concerns, Vifor proposed commitments, which were market tested between April and May 2024. Based on the feedback, Vifor adjusted its commitments to include a comprehensive communication campaign to rectify misleading messages about Monofer.
Key commitments include:
The Commission concluded that these commitments address its competition concerns and made them legally binding. This decision follows a formal antitrust investigation initiated in June 2022 after a complaint by Pharmacosmos. A confidential settlement between Vifor and Pharmacosmos in February 2024 also influenced the Commission's decision.
10. European Commission Secures Apple’s Compliance to Address Antitrust Concerns Over NFC
The European Commission has made legally binding the commitments offered by Apple to address competition concerns regarding access to Near-Field-Communication (NFC) technology on iPhones. The Commission's investigation revealed that Apple’s refusal to grant NFC access to rival mobile wallet developers, while reserving it for Apple Pay, potentially breached EU antitrust rules.
Apple controls all aspects of its iOS ecosystem, which includes Apple Pay, the only mobile wallet accessing NFC hardware and software on iOS devices. This exclusivity raised competition concerns, as it might have excluded competitors and stifled innovation and choice for iPhone users.
To resolve these issues, Apple proposed several commitments:
Following a market test between January and February 2024, Apple enhanced its commitments, including extending HCE payment initiation to other industry-certified terminals and easing developer requirements. These commitments will remain in force for ten years and apply throughout the European Economic Area (EEA), monitored by an appointed trustee.
The European Commission concluded that these measures effectively address its competition concerns, ensuring fair access and promoting innovation in the mobile payments market.
C. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ????
11. Five Convictions in Ready-Mix Concrete Antitrust Investigation
A jury in the U.S. District Court in Savannah, Georgia, convicted Gregory and David Melton yesterday for their involvement in a conspiracy to fix prices, rig bids, and allocate markets for ready-mix concrete sales in Georgia and South Carolina. The scheme, which operated from 2010 to July 2016, included coordinating price-increase letters, allocating specific jobs in coastal Georgia, and submitting collusive bids at noncompetitive prices.
This investigation has led to five criminal convictions and one deferred prosecution agreement. James Pedrick, Timothy Strickland, and Strickland’s company, Evans LLC, previously pleaded guilty to participating in the same conspiracy. Argos USA LLC, Pedrick’s former employer, entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with the Antitrust Division, admitted its role in the conspiracy, and agreed to pay a $20 million criminal penalty.
D. FRANCE ????
12. French Competition Authority Penalizes SDU for Enforcing Minimum Resale Prices
The Autorité de la concurrence has imposed a €500,000 fine on SDU for issuing recommended prices to its distributors and ensuring compliance through a strict monitoring system. These practices aimed to control the retail prices of Uby wines and Armagnacs, preventing resellers from setting prices below the recommended levels.
The investigation revealed that SDU's contractual agreements with distributors, which included wholesalers, cafés, hotels, restaurants, wine merchants, and online retailers, contained clauses that restricted pricing freedom. SDU monitored compliance directly and through its distributors, who could report any competitors not adhering to the pricing instructions. The enforcement mechanisms included reminders, financial penalties, and delivery delays.
SDU did not contest the allegations and requested a settlement procedure. Considering the severity and duration of the practices, which lasted over three years, the Autorité decided on a fine of €500,000, to be paid jointly and severally with SDU’s parent company. This decision underscores the importance of maintaining fair competition and the consequences of price-fixing practices in the market.
13. Competition Analysis Begins for France’s Video Content Creation Sector
The Autorité de la concurrence has initiated an ex officio inquiry into the video content creation sector in France. This rapidly growing industry involves the production and sharing of videos by creators on platforms like YouTube, Dailymotion, Twitch, and TikTok, aiming to reach audiences and, often, generate income.
Since the late 2000s, video content creation has become an integral part of the French audiovisual landscape, with leading creators amassing millions of subscribers. The sector's expansion is marked by an increase in platform users, diverse video topics (ranging from humor and gaming to lifestyle and news), and varied formats (short, long, and live videos).
The professionalization of video content creation, driven by income opportunities through monetization and commercial partnerships, has transformed it into a significant economic activity. Recognizing this, the Autorité will analyze competition among online video content creators in France and assess the dynamics between content creators, creator agencies, and sharing platforms.
领英推荐
The inquiry will focus on:
This comprehensive analysis aims to ensure fair competition and support the continued growth and innovation within France’s video content creation sector.
E. TURKEY ????
14. Competition Board Opens Investigation into Electric Vehicle Charging Exclusivity on ?zmir-?stanbul Highway
The Competition Board has initiated an investigation into alleged competition law violations related to the provision of electric vehicle (EV) charging services on the ?zmir-?stanbul O-5 highway. The inquiry follows claims of exclusivity practices that potentially breach competition regulations.
After reviewing the gathered information and documents during a preliminary inquiry, the Board held a meeting on July 4, 2024, and found the evidence substantial enough to warrant further investigation. Consequently, the Board issued decision no. 24-28/679-M to investigate:
O?B operates the service facilities, known as Oksijen, along the ?zmir-?stanbul O-5 highway, which links Kocaeli and ?zmir via the Osmangazi Bridge. ZES is a prominent operator in the installation and operation of EV charging stations across Türkiye.
The Board's investigation aims to ensure compliance with competition laws and to maintain fair practices within the growing EV charging sector in Türkiye. The outcome of this investigation will be closely watched by industry stakeholders and consumers alike, as it could significantly impact the future operations and competitive landscape of EV charging services on this crucial highway.
15. Google Found Not Guilty of Abusing Dominant Position by Turkish Competition Board
The Turkish Competition Board has concluded its investigation into allegations that Google, an economic entity comprising Alphabet Inc., Google LLC, Google International LLC, Google Ireland Limited, and Google Reklamc?l?k ve Pazarlama Ltd. ?ti., violated Article 6 of the Act no. 4054 on the Protection of Competition. The investigation, launched on January 12, 2023, examined claims that Google used its dominant position in the general search services market to obstruct the operations of other websites through certain search features.
The Board investigated allegations that features such as "videos," "people also ask," "translation box," "sports box," and "weather box" on Google's search results pages pushed other websites further down, causing them to lose traffic. Following a hearing at the Competition Authority Headquarters on June 25, 2024, the Board took its final decision.
On July 4, 2024, the Board issued decision no. 24-28/682-283, concluding that while Google holds a dominant position in the general search services market, it did not abuse this position through the search features offered on its search engine results page. As a result, the Board determined that it was unnecessary to impose administrative fines on Google.
To date, Google has been fined a total of 1.25 billion TL in previous investigations conducted by the Authority. Besides the current investigation that concluded without penalties, Google is also under another investigation. This ongoing inquiry examines allegations that Google favored its own products and services in the advertisement technology supply chain, directing demand from demand-side platforms (DSPs) to its own supply-side platform (SSP) services, and favoring its own SSP (AdX) through its publisher ad server.
F. GERMANY ????
16. German Telecommunications Firm AVM Fined for Vertical Price Fixing
The Bundeskartellamt has imposed fines totaling nearly €16 million on AVM Computersysteme Vertriebs GmbH, a Berlin-based telecommunications and network technology company, and one of its staff members for engaging in vertical price fixing with six electronics retailers. AVM, a prominent German manufacturer known for its "FRITZ!" brand of routers, repeaters, telephones, and smart home products, coordinated end consumer prices with these retailers to enforce higher prices.
The investigation was triggered by an anonymous tip-off to the Bundeskartellamt’s whistleblowing system and further tips from market participants, leading to a dawn raid in February 2022. The probe revealed that AVM employees were not only negotiating purchase prices but also actively coordinating end consumer prices with the involved retailers. This coordination aimed primarily at price increases, with AVM employees demanding certain minimum sales prices, known as "target prices," which ranged between the recommended retail price and the retailers' purchase price.
AVM employees monitored the retailers' end consumer prices through in-store research, online price comparison services, and specialized software implemented as of mid-2019. The coordination intensified particularly when consumer prices fell significantly below the "target prices" or after complaints from retailers about insufficient consumer prices. In many cases, following AVM's objections, the retailers agreed to raise their end consumer prices accordingly.
G. JAPAN ????
17. ASP Japan Ordered to Stop Tie-in Sales and Unfair Practices by JFTC
The Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) has issued a cease and desist order to ASP Japan G.K for engaging in tie-in sales and unfair trade practices. The order addresses ASP Japan's anticompetitive conduct concerning the sale of automated endoscope reprocessors and related disinfectants.
The issue traces back to an agreement between Johnson & Johnson and Amano Co., Ltd. in August 2003. Under this agreement, Amano manufactured automated endoscope reprocessors for Johnson & Johnson, which had the exclusive right to sell these products. After an absorption-type company split on April 1, 2019, ASP Japan inherited this contractual status.
With the expiration of Johnson & Johnson's patent on phtharal in April 2013, generics entered the market, offering cheaper alternatives to Johnson & Johnson's "Disopa Solution 0.55%" (DISOPA). Concerned about losing market share, Johnson & Johnson developed a successor model to the Legacy Endoclens that included a barcode reader. This reader made the cleaning and disinfecting functions operable only if it read a 2D code affixed to the DISOPA bottle, effectively blocking the use of generic phtharal.
ASP Japan continued this practice after inheriting the business, promoting the replacement of the Legacy Endoclens with the new model to secure DISOPA sales. Additionally, in 2020, ASP Japan instructed Amano to refuse a generic manufacturer's request to disclose the 2D code specifications.
The JFTC's cease and desist order mandates that ASP Japan must stop compelling medical institutions to purchase DISOPA in conjunction with the New Type Endoclens. ASP Japan is also required to implement compliance guidelines and regular training for its employees, alongside third-party audits, to ensure adherence to fair trade practices.
H. POLAND ????
18. UOKiK Fines PayPal PLN 106.6 Million for Abusive Clauses in User Agreement
The President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) has fined PayPal PLN 106.6 million for using prohibited clauses in its "PayPal User Agreement." The decision mandates that PayPal amend these contract terms.
The investigation found that the agreement listed 34 prohibited activities and arbitrary sanctions. Among these were punitive actions for merely attempting to use a blocked account and broad clauses stating that users must not "violate any law" under threat of unspecified sanctions. This could lead to penalties for violations unrelated to PayPal account use, causing user uncertainty.
UOKiK criticized PayPal's open-ended sanctions, which were not tied to specific violations, allowing the company to act arbitrarily. PayPal could block funds "at any time" for an unspecified duration and impose multiple sanctions simultaneously, such as fines, account closure without notice, and denial of future services.
These terms left consumers unaware of what actions might be prohibited and unable to predict sanctions, potentially depriving them of access to funds indefinitely. PayPal must inform consumers about the decision on its website once it becomes final. The decision can be appealed in court. More details are available in the UOKiK President's decision.
I. BRAZIL ????
19. Aftermarket Auto Parts Cartel: CADE Issues Conviction and Fine
On May 22, the Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE) convicted an individual for involvement in a cartel within the independent aftermarket (IAM) and original equipment market (OEM) for auto parts, while dismissing charges against two others. The case began in 2017 following a leniency agreement with Mahle and Mahle GmbH.
The cartel affected the distribution chain of various auto parts, such as engine pistons and rod bearings, by fixing prices and trading conditions. In 2021, some involved parties admitted their participation and signed a Cease and Desist Agreement, resulting in over BRL 30 million in contributions.
Commissioner Carlos Jacques Vieira Gomes found sufficient evidence to prove the involvement of a former KSPG Automotive Brazil executive in cartel activities from 2007-2008 and 2008-2010. The Tribunal unanimously convicted the executive, imposing a fine of BRL 324,116.00, while dismissing charges against two others.
20. CADE Investigates Major Players in Light Vehicle Market for Innovation Coordination
The Office of the Superintendent-General (SG/CADE), the investigative arm of Brazil’s Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE), has initiated an administrative proceeding to examine alleged violations of economic order in the international market for passenger light vehicles. This marks a historic first for Brazil's Competition Authority, as it investigates allegations of competitors attempting to reduce competition through coordinated innovation efforts.
The investigation targets six companies and 23 individuals accused of exchanging competitively sensitive information to align their research and development activities. Such institutionalized sensitive information exchange, if proven, could significantly hinder innovation and disrupt market dynamics.
The launch of the administrative proceeding signifies a critical step in addressing these allegations. The defendants will be notified and given the opportunity to present their defenses. Following the investigation, the Office of the Superintendent-General will issue an opinion on whether to convict or dismiss the case. The investigative body will then submit its findings to the Tribunal of CADE, which will make the final decision.
J. CANADA ????
21. Competition Bureau Investigates Kalibrate's Impact on Gas Station Pricing
The Competition Bureau has secured a court order to collect information for its ongoing investigation into Kalibrate's data, pricing, and consultation services. Kalibrate, a provider of services to various industries including the Canadian retail gas sector, is now required by the Federal Court of Canada to produce records and relevant written information.
The investigation focuses on how Kalibrate offers pricing guidance to gas station operators and provides them with insights into their competitors' pricing through its products. The Bureau aims to determine if these services negatively impact competition among gas stations in Canada.
At this stage, the investigation does not imply any conclusion of wrongdoing. The Bureau is conducting a thorough examination to understand the potential effects of Kalibrate's products on market competition.
K. GREECE ????
22. Hellenic Competition Commission Investigates Limited Pass-Through of ECB Rate Hikes to Greek Deposit Rates
The Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC) has initiated a sector inquiry into the deposit interest rates offered by Greek banks, following concerns about limited pass-through of European Central Bank (ECB) rate hikes. Between July 2022 and September 2023, the ECB increased its deposit facility rate, yet Greek banks have been slow to adjust their rates accordingly. The pass-through of these increases has been limited when compared to other Eurozone countries and past practices within Greece's banking sector.
The inquiry, announced on July 18, 2024, will explore the competitive conditions in the market for bank deposits, aiming to identify any distortions that may hinder fair competition.
As part of the initial phase, the HCC has launched a public consultation, inviting stakeholders to share their views on the current state of competition in the Greek banking sector. The insights gathered will be crucial in shaping the HCC's recommendations for enhancing market competition.
23. ELOMAS Fined €172,424 for Market Allocation among Retailers
The Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC) has unanimously accepted the Settlement Proposal submitted by “EL.OM.A.S. GREEK SUPERMARKET BUYING ALLIANCE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY” (ELOMAS) after evidence confirmed a violation of antitrust law. The case revolved around the retail market for supermarket products, where ELOMAS was found to have engaged in anti-competitive practices.
Evidence revealed that ELOMAS received written complaints from its members, demanding that new retail stores should not be established within a specific distance from existing stores operated by other alliance members. This practice, governed by a General Assembly decision, enforced a geographical restriction of 1000 meters outside Athens and Thessaloniki, and 300 meters within these cities.
Recognizing its involvement in market allocation, a clear restriction of competition, ELOMAS requested to enter into a Settlement Procedure. The alliance has since revised its Statute and Internal Rules, emphasizing the importance of competition law and explicitly prohibiting market allocation among its members.
As part of the settlement, the HCC imposed a fine of €172,424 on ELOMAS, reduced due to the alliance’s participation in the Settlement Procedure.
L. PORTUGAL ????
24. Portuguese Competition Authority Fines Laboratory Cartel €48.6 Million
On July 17, 2024, the Portuguese Competition Authority (AdC) imposed fines totaling €48,610,000 on a business association and five major laboratory groups for their involvement in a cartel that manipulated the Portuguese market for clinical analyses and COVID-19 tests from 2016 to 2022.
The cartel, formed through the laboratories’ participation in the association's management, engaged in price-fixing and geographic market division, increasing their bargaining power with both public and private entities. This coordination allowed the laboratories to secure prices and commercial conditions more favorable than would have been achieved through individual negotiations, hindering potential price reductions and delaying competition.
The availability of testing sites and capacity for mass COVID-19 testing was critical in supporting Portugal’s National Health Service (SNS) during the pandemic, with over 40 million tests conducted by March 2022. The AdC's investigation was sparked by a leniency application, which granted immunity from fines to the company that cooperated fully with the investigation.
This decision follows two previous rulings in December 2023, where two multinational laboratory groups opted for the settlement procedure, avoiding further legal disputes and paying fines totaling €8,900,000. One of these companies also received an additional fine reduction under the Leniency Program for its cooperation.
M. AUSTRALIA ????
25. Telstra and Optus Agree to End Exclusive Google Search Deals
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted undertakings from Telstra and Optus as part of its ongoing investigation into Google's search services in Australia. The investigation revealed that Google had agreements with both Telstra and Optus, ensuring its search services were pre-installed as the default on Android devices supplied by these companies. These agreements, in place since at least 2017, restricted rival search engines from being pre-installed and promoted on Android devices in exchange for a share of Google's advertising revenue.
The agreements with Google expired on June 30, 2024. Following the ACCC's investigation, Telstra and Optus have both undertaken not to renew these agreements or enter into any new exclusive arrangements with Google that would require its search services to be pre-installed and set as the default on devices they supply.
These undertakings by Telstra and Optus address the ACCC's concerns about their role in the alleged anti-competitive conduct.
See You Next Month ??